Fleming v. Lullman
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Thayer, J. The original debt, 'as evinced by the certificates of deposit, or the original contract-, for the purpose of the remedy is the “ cause of action,” yet the right to maintain that action arose when the promises was made, not, however, upon the promise but upon the original contract. — Dusenbury v. Hoyt, 53 N. Y. 521; Marshall v. Gray, 74 Ill. 379; Turner v. Moore, 20 Ohio, 333; Carr v. Hurlbut, 41 Mo. 264; Smith’s Ld.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Thayer, J. The original debt, 'as evinced by the certificates of deposit, or the original contract-, for the purpose of the remedy is the “ cause of action,” yet the right to maintain that action arose when the promises was made, not, however, upon the promise but upon the original contract. — Dusenbury v. Hoyt, 53 N. Y. 521; Marshall v. Gray, 74 Ill. 379; Turner v. Moore, 20 Ohio, 333; Carr v. Hurlbut, 41 Mo. 264; Smith’s Ld. Cas. 616; Sands v. Gelston, 15 Johns. 519; Depuy v. Swart, 13 Wend. 135. It is settled in this State that a promise to pay a…
1Opinion of the CourtBakewell, J.
This was a proceeding begun in the' probate court to obtain an allowance against the estate of George C. Miller, deceased, on three certificates of deposit. On trial anew in the circuit court the claim was disallowed.
One of the certificates was as follows: “$1,033.09. Banking-House of Miller & Karst, St. Louis, Mo., October 6, 1865. —^Fleming & Lockhardt have deposited with us one thousand, thirty-three, and nine one-hundredths dollars, payable to the order of themselves, on return of this, certificate, six years after date, with interest at the rate of no per cent per annum. Miller & Karst.”…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sands v. GelstonNew York Supreme Court · 1818
- Depuy v. SwartNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Dusenbury v. . HoytNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Soulden v. Van RensselaerNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Graham v. HuntCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1847
3Cited by6 opinions
- Farmers & Merchants Bank v. RichardsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- Crandall v. DurhamSupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
- Ferguson-McKinney Dry Goods Co. v. BeuckmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1917
- Harper v. EubankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
- Donnell v. EnglandSupreme Court of Missouri · 1940
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.