Osborn v. Emery
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the DeKalb Circuit Court. — Hon. Chas. H. S. Goodman, Judge. (1) The demurrer to the evidence offered at the close of plaintiff’s testimony should have been sustained. There is no evidence in the record of a contract to do the work, between plaintiff and defend-ants. The strongest construction that can be placed ■on plaintiff’s unsupported testimony is that defendants simply agreed, orally, to see him paid, and this comes within the statute of frauds.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the DeKalb Circuit Court. — Hon. Chas. H. S. Goodman, Judge. (1) The demurrer to the evidence offered at the close of plaintiff’s testimony should have been sustained. There is no evidence in the record of a contract to do the work, between plaintiff and defend-ants. The strongest construction that can be placed ■on plaintiff’s unsupported testimony is that defendants simply agreed, orally, to see him paid, and this comes within the statute of frauds. Revised Statutes, 1889, sec. 5186; Bissigv. Britton, 59 Mo. 204; Rottmanv.Fix, 25 Mo. App. 571; Glenn v. Lehnen, 54 Mo. 45; Rottman…
1Opinion of the CourtGill, J.
During the summer of 1889 there were-being erected at St. Joseph, Missouri, the buildings and improvements necessary for the conduct of a fair and exposition, and the defendants, Emery and Huffman, were directors of the company or association so engaged. The work seems to have been lagging, and in August the defendants sought the plaintiff Osborn, and induced him to take charge of the work and push to-completion the construction of the amphitheater, etc., for which he was to be paid the sum of $1,000. The-plaintiff performed the work in the manner, and within the time agreed on, presented his…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Swarens v. PfniselSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
- Wilt v. HammondMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Chick v. Frey Coal Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1899
- Frissell v. WilliamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901