Legal Opinion

Hodgson v. Pixlee

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided November 8, 1954No. 44305PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAN OSDOL, Commissioner.

This is an action on a promissory note. Defendant interposed the defenses of limitation of actions, Section 516.110 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S'., and illegality of consideration. Judgment was rendered plaintiff for $15,000 in accordance with a jury’s verdict. Defendant has appealed.

Herein upon appeal defendant-appellant contends the trial court erred in refusing to sustain defendant’s motion for directed verdict. Defendant-appellant asserts that the evidence shows the note was given for and in consideration of obligationsjncurred in gambling transactions; and, moreover, that…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Crawford v. SpencerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  2. Goslin v. KurnSupreme Court of Missouri · 1943
  3. Connor v. BlackSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
  4. Kent v. MiltenbergerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1883
  5. Von Eime v. FuchsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Frank v. Wabash Railroad CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
  2. Caffey v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1956
  3. Hillhouse v. City of AuroraMissouri Court of Appeals · 1958
  4. State ex rel. Burcham v. Drainage District No. 25Missouri Court of Appeals · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API