Howe v. Bristow
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Buchanan Circuit Court. — Hon. H. M. Ramey, Judge. (1) The court erred in sustaining the motion for judgment, and in overruling the motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment. It was not within the province or power of the circuit court to make a new contract for these parties. The simple duty of the court was to interpret and enforce the contract as entered into by the parties. The answer was sufficient and raised issues to be tried by a jury.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Buchanan Circuit Court. — Hon. H. M. Ramey, Judge. (1) The court erred in sustaining the motion for judgment, and in overruling the motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment. It was not within the province or power of the circuit court to make a new contract for these parties. The simple duty of the court was to interpret and enforce the contract as entered into by the parties. The answer was sufficient and raised issues to be tried by a jury. (2) The plaintiff could not recover except by showing to the satisfaction of the court or a jury that the circumstances of the…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
The plaintiffs in their petition alleged that the defendants owed them the sum of $700, less three small credits, for an undivided one half interest in a certain stock of goods, wares, merchandise, etc., sold by the plaintiffs to the defendant.
The answer of the defendant was substantially as follows: That on the fifth day of April, 1894, and for a long time prior thereto, he was engaged in business as a plumber in connection with, and as a partner of, the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs, who are husband and wife, being jointly the owners of one half and the defendant owning the other half, and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Salinas v. WrightTexas Supreme Court · 1854
- Ubsdell v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Missouri · 1855
- Tureman v. StephensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sallee v. McMurryMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905