Hatchett v. Emerson
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Pike Circuit Court. — Hon. Reuben F. Rot, Judge. The court erred in giving the instruction which precluded a recovery by plaintiff on the second count of the petition. Taylor v. Short, 38 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Pike Circuit Court. — Hon. Reuben F. Rot, Judge. The court erred in giving the instruction which precluded a recovery by plaintiff on the second count of the petition. Taylor v. Short, 38 Mo. App. 21; Zwisler v. Storts, 30 Id. 163; Tioopey v. Fruin, 96 Mo. 104; Charles v. Patch, 87 Id. 450. Defendant’s objection to the introduction of any testimony under the first count of the petition should have been sustained for the reason that the rescission of a contract for fraud must be exercised promptly, and dis-affirmance must be in tbto. Fstes v. Reynolds, 75 Mo. 563; Melton v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
This case is here by cross appeals and by separate transcripts and briefs; the cases have been consolidated by order of this court and will be treated as one case. The plaintiff was the owner of a jack named Triumph; with a view of selling him she wrote the defendant (who seems to have been a dealer *284in that kind of property), the following letter, dated March 12, 1894:
“New Florence, Mo., March 12, 1894.
11 Mr. Emerson:
“Dear Sir: I have been looking for yon to come over. You promised to do so as soon as your brother Luke returned. You remember you told Thos. Hatchett as soon after he got back…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Reed v. BottSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
- Ross v. RossSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Baldwin v. WhaleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
3Cited by1 opinion
- Price v. ClevengerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903