Hickey v. Ryan
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court. !. The verdict was against evidence, and for more than plaintiff’s whole claim, under his ' bill of particulars. 2. The set off of the notes, ought to have been allowed.
Read the full summary
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court. !. The verdict was against evidence, and for more than plaintiff’s whole claim, under his ' bill of particulars. 2. The set off of the notes, ought to have been allowed. They were clearly proved, and nothing was shown to impeach them. 3. The third instruction of the court compelled the jury, under the proof, to find a verdict for the defendant, and to allow the notes as a set off. 4. The fourth instruction of the court authorizes the jury to find a verdict on a state of facts that had no existence in proof. The jury were thereby authorized to infer and to…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by Hickey against Ryan, for services rendered. Hickey recovered judgment, upon which this writ of error is prosecuted by Ryan.
Hickey was employed by Ryan for a number of years, as a laborer, at $14 00 per month, until his account amounted to a considerable sum. During the course of his employent, or shortly after its termination, Ryan obtained from him promissory notes amounting to $1400. There was sonto proof that the consideration of these notes was the sale of an *64ice house. The subscribing witness to two of the notes, testified, that “to the best of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Carson v. BlakeySupreme Court of Missouri · 1840
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. SearcyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
- Lohrum v. EyermannMissouri Court of Appeals · 1878