Dean v. McFaul
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court. This was a suit to recover of defendants, Mogridge & Mc-Faul, the value of certain barrels of oil shipped by plaintiff to the firm of Mogridge & McFaul. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtRylaND, Judge
The only question in this case is, whether the court erred in excluding the evidence of the contents of notice of dissolution of the partnership of Mogridge & McFaul to the plaintiff. There is nothing in this question ; for if the evidence had been admitted, it could not have changed the result, and, of course, its exclusion is no ground for reversal.
The oil had been shipped to the firm of Mogridge & McFaul in April, 1858 ; was received by them for sale on commission. In June following, McFaul, upon a dissolution of the partnership, retires from the firm, leaving the oil with his former…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Drake v. HanshawSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- Western Lumber & Pole Co. v. JoslynWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Powell v. RobertsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906