Legal Opinion

Gale v. Foss

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided January 15, 1871PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Error to First District Court. referred to Dozier v. Jerman, 30 Mo. 218; Ferguson v. Hann. & St. Jo. R.R. Co., 35 Mo. 452 ; Allen v. Ranson, 44 Mo. 263; Hendricks v. Dexter, 35 Barb., N. Y., 97 ; Russell v. Conn, 20 N. Y. 81.

1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge

The point raised in this court, that the petition alleged two separate breaches on bonds and that the verdict should have shown the finding on each, was not taken in the court below, either by any pleading or by motion in arrest of judgment. The case was not treated as an action on a bond. The pleader evidently stated the substance of the bonds as matter of inducement, but the gist of the action was upon an amount found due on settlement. It was obviously upon this theory that the case was tried by both *277parties. They proceeded to trial on this view, and the answers of the defendants were…

2Cited by17 opinions

  1. Williams v. Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
  2. Walser v. WearSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
  3. Ely v. PorterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
  4. Bremen Mining & Milling Co. v. BremenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Bungenstock v. Nishnabotna Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901

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

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

Powered by the Exa API