Hodgson v. Pixlee
Supreme Court of Missouri
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
- Crawford v. SpencerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Goslin v. KurnSupreme Court of Missouri · 1943
- Connor v. BlackSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Kent v. MiltenbergerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1883
- Von Eime v. FuchsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Frank v. Wabash Railroad CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
- Caffey v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1956
- Hillhouse v. City of AuroraMissouri Court of Appeals · 1958
- State ex rel. Burcham v. Drainage District No. 25Missouri Court of Appeals · 1955