Jones, Edwards & Co. v. Grossman
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Boone Circuit Court.—Hon. Jno. A. Hockaday, Judge. Instruction number 1 on behalf of defendant-should not have been given, for there was no evidence that Dingle sold the whisky to Head & Denham on their credit, and no evidence that he or plaintiffs ever looked to them for pay, or that Head & Denham ever . promised to pay, or ever expected to pay. Instruction number 3 on behalf of defendant does not state the law correctly.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Boone Circuit Court.—Hon. Jno. A. Hockaday, Judge. Instruction number 1 on behalf of defendant-should not have been given, for there was no evidence that Dingle sold the whisky to Head & Denham on their credit, and no evidence that he or plaintiffs ever looked to them for pay, or that Head & Denham ever . promised to pay, or ever expected to pay. Instruction number 3 on behalf of defendant does not state the law correctly. A contract may be made with a person and credit extended to him, although he is to receive no benefit therefor; but defendant did receive pay from Head &…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
This is an action which was brought-on account for $125, for one barrel of whisky, sold and delivered by plaintiffs to defendant. The answer was a general denial.
The plaintiffs’ evidence tended most strongly to prove about these facts: Plaintiffs were wholesale liquor dealers in St. Louis, and defendant was a saloon keeper in Roehepoi't, Boone county. Eor some years-prior to February, 1893, the defendant had been ordering liquors from plaintiffs, through their traveling salesmen, and having the same shipped to him via the Wabash railroad to Cólumbia, and then hauled to Rocheport by the hack…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Weidemeyer v. WoodrumMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Hutchinson v. Reliance Realty Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1901