Rector of Mount Calvary Church v. Albers
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Son. Sel~ den P. Spencer, Judge.. There was a contract between plaintiff and defendant, which entitles the latter to the beneficial use of the money in question until such time as he may be required to pay out the same for bills incurred for building a new church. (1) The guaranty taken in connection with its acceptance, shows of itself a contract between the vestry and defendant, corresponding to the terms of the guaranty.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Son. Sel~ den P. Spencer, Judge.. There was a contract between plaintiff and defendant, which entitles the latter to the beneficial use of the money in question until such time as he may be required to pay out the same for bills incurred for building a new church. (1) The guaranty taken in connection with its acceptance, shows of itself a contract between the vestry and defendant, corresponding to the terms of the guaranty. “The contract of a guarantor, as embodied in the guaranty, is collateral to the agreement of a principal; it is a separate…
1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, J.
This is an action to recover $7,-772.13, with five per cent interest. The answer admits-*334that the amount claimed is correct, but sets up two specific defenses, to-wit: first, that the plaintiff loaned him tide money, he to pay five per cent interest per annum for the use, “until such time as the same might be required to be paid out for the construction of a church building for plaintiff,” and that the plaintiff is not ready or able to construct such a building, therefore the debt is not due; and, second, that the fund was contributed by various persons for the construction of a new church,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Graham v. RingoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
- Central Savings Bank v. ShineSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Hill v. CombsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- McNew v. BoothSupreme Court of Missouri · 1868
- Salisbury v. Renick & PetersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Harris Banking Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Casey v. St. Louis Transit Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Sutton, Steele & Steele Manufacturing, Milling & Mining Co. v. McCulloughSupreme Court of Colorado · 1918
- Kintner v. WolfeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966
- State ex rel. Rife v. HawesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.