Floersh v. Bank of Missouri
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. The bill of exceptions in this case, does not on its face purport to contain aU the evidence in the cause.
Read the full summary
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. The bill of exceptions in this case, does not on its face purport to contain aU the evidence in the cause. But unless the hill of exceptions gives all the evidence in the cause, this Court upon the authority of its own decisions “will not interfere with the decision of the Circuit Court and order a new trial” — Vaughan vs. Montgomery, 5 Mo., 529; Hughes vs. Ellison, 5 Mo., 110. 2. The instructions given by the court below, were r.ot excepted to by the plaintiff, and nothing' occurring on the trial can be assigned for error in the Supreme Court, except what…
1Opinion of the CourtMcBride, J.
Jacob Floersh brought an action of assumpsit against the Bank, in the Circuit Court of St. Louis county. The declaration beside tin- common count, contained several special counts, charging that the plaintiff deposited with the Bank for collection, a negotiable promissory note, dated the lOtii February, 1842, payable two months thereafter, at the said Bank, for the sum of $550, executed by one Loimstroom to Charles F. Hoetzel, and by him endorsed to Edward Warrens, and by said Warrens endorsed to the plaintiff; which said note so deposited with the said Bank, the Bank failed to have presented…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hughes v. EllisonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1838
3Cited by1 opinion
- McLendon v. BushSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900