Powers v. Allen
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from Franklin Circuit court. 'fhg consideration of the note was either for the mnexpired term of Wm. Powers orto prevent Allen from publishing John A. Powers in'the Lynchburg papers or the combination of both considerations.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Franklin Circuit court. 'fhg consideration of the note was either for the mnexpired term of Wm. Powers orto prevent Allen from publishing John A. Powers in'the Lynchburg papers or the combination of both considerations. If the note was given upon the statement of Allen, that 15 months of his time was unexpired, Ihen it was given upon the misrepresentation of Allen as to that matfer, wilful it must be presumed, and he would not be entitled to recover only between a third and a fourth of the amount. If the sole consideration of the note was the value of Wm. Powers’ unexpired time it…
1Opinion of the CourtBirch, J.
The evidence in the case as prescribed in the bill of exceptions, is substantially as follows:
William Powers, a brother of the defendant, had been placed by his Father with Allen, the plaintiff, to learn the trade of a tailor. The testimony is somewhat conflicting and doubtful as to the length of time he was to remain and consequently the portion unfulfilled at the time he absconded, but it was proven that the defendant knew what the understanding was about the time it was originally entered into, and it is at least inferable from the correspondence between him and the plaintiff, which…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Baker v. Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Danforth v. Lindell Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Gaines v. FenderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Hill v. BaileyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1879
- Naughton v. StaggMissouri Court of Appeals · 1877
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.