Legal Opinion

Cornet v. Cabrilliac

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided May 26, 1910PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Matt. G. Reynolds, Judge. (1) Upon this appeal, from the trial court’s order sustaining the motion for a new trial, the whole record is before this court for review.

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Matt. G. Reynolds, Judge. (1) Upon this appeal, from the trial court’s order sustaining the motion for a new trial, the whole record is before this court for review. Scullin v. Railroad, 192 Mo. 5, 184 Mo. 695. (2) As the Law of 1903 (p. 161), making it a misdemeanor to offer real estate for sale “in cities of three hundred thousand inhabitants or more, ’ ’ can never, under its terms, apply to more than one city in the State, and the exigencies of the- case were not such that a general law could not have heen made applicable, it is both local…

1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.

This suit was instituted to recover the sum of $250, claimed by plaintiffs as commissions due them for selling a lot of real estate belonging to the defendants, situate in the city of St Louis.

The trial before the justice of the peace resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendants; upon an appeal to the circuit court, a trial de novo was had, which resulted1 in a judgment against four of the defendants and in favor of the defendant Amelia A. Altenbaumer,' she not having been properly served. A motion for a new trial was sustained, and plaintiffs duly appealed to this court.

There are a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Woolley v. MearsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Printz v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API