Morrison v. Edgar ex rel. Brent
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Cooper Circuit Court. 1. It was competent and legal for Morrison, in his defence to the action, to show that the note sued on was obtained from him without consideration, or that the consideration of the note, if any, had failed, and consequently the court erred in rejecting the evidence offered by him to the jury, to prove that Robert Brent had no right or title to the negroes for which he had giren the note. Digest 1845, tit.
Read the full summary
Error to Cooper Circuit Court. 1. It was competent and legal for Morrison, in his defence to the action, to show that the note sued on was obtained from him without consideration, or that the consideration of the note, if any, had failed, and consequently the court erred in rejecting the evidence offered by him to the jury, to prove that Robert Brent had no right or title to the negroes for which he had giren the note. Digest 1845, tit. Justices’ Courts, article 5, sec. 14. 6 Mo. Rep. 642-8, Jones y. Shaver. 10 Mo. Rep. 267-8. 7 Cowen, 382. 11 John. 50. 8 Cowen, 31. 7. John. R. 26. 17 ib.…
1Opinion of the CourtGamble, Judge
Edgar, suing for the use of Brent, commenced Ms action before a justice of the peace, again Morrison, upon a promissory note for one hundred dollars, which was payable to Brent.
Brent, by his agents, sold certain slaves to Morrison, for nine hundred and fifty dollars, of which eight hundred and fifty dollars was paid in cash, and the present note was given for the balance of the purchase money. At the time of the sale, a bill of sale for the slaves was made, in which a warranty was inserted, by which Brent warranted the “ title to said negroes to be good in the said Morrison, his heirs and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Matheny v. MasonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- Botts v. SpencerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890