Smith v. Paris
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Greene Cireuit Court. I. Parties making a mistake in matters of fact are not held bound by acts committed by them under such mistake. (Marshall vs. Collett, 1 Y. & C. 238 ; Groves vs. Perkins, 6 Sim., 57.6 ; Currie vs. Steele, 2 Sandford, S. 0., 542; Turner vs. Turner, 2 Ch. E., 81; Bingham vs. Bingham, 1 Yes., 127; Gee vs. Spenser, 1 Yerm., 32; 1 Sto.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Greene Cireuit Court. I. Parties making a mistake in matters of fact are not held bound by acts committed by them under such mistake. (Marshall vs. Collett, 1 Y. & C. 238 ; Groves vs. Perkins, 6 Sim., 57.6 ; Currie vs. Steele, 2 Sandford, S. 0., 542; Turner vs. Turner, 2 Ch. E., 81; Bingham vs. Bingham, 1 Yes., 127; Gee vs. Spenser, 1 Yerm., 32; 1 Sto. Eq., 8 Ed., § 138, and note 1; §§ 138, 140, Ibid, 141; Id. 147.) I. The compromise of a doubtful claim, or the relinquishment of a pending suit or proceeding, is a good consideration for a promise. (Stoddard vs. Mix, 14 Conn., 12;…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, Judge
-This suit was on a note. The answer admitted the execution' of the note, but set up as a defense, that it was made by defendant under ignorance of facts; that he was administrator of the estate of one Young, and he supposed that there were assets sufficient to pay all demands in the fifth class, but that he was mistaken in this; that the amount of assets, charged *276against him as administrator, was not correct, and the amount credited as paid out by him was not correct; that he has ascertained since the said note was given, that the order of the court for distribution among creditors was…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Citizens' Trust Co. v. McDougaldTennessee Supreme Court · 1915
- Smith v. ParisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879