Mangelsdorf Bros. v. Harnden Seed Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Eon. John G. Park, Judge. (1) The court erred in refusing to sustain appellant’s application for a continuance on the ground that the petition did not describe the goods and merchandise alleged to have been sold and delivered, and no itemized account was filed with the petition, after sustaining appellant’s objection to 'the introduction of evidence on the petition, and permitting respondent to file itemized statement of account in…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Eon. John G. Park, Judge. (1) The court erred in refusing to sustain appellant’s application for a continuance on the ground that the petition did not describe the goods and merchandise alleged to have been sold and delivered, and no itemized account was filed with the petition, after sustaining appellant’s objection to 'the introduction of evidence on the petition, and permitting respondent to file itemized statement of account in amendment of its petition. Risher v. Thomas, 1 Mo. 739; Dempsey v. Harrison, 4 Mo. 267; Tunstal v. Hamilton, 8 Mo. 500;.…
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
Plaintiff, a corporation, brought suit on an account alleging that defendant was indebted to plaintiff in the sum of $507.44, for goods, wares and merchandise sold and delivered, “all of which items of goods, Avares and merchandise and the said credits are shown by the itemized statement of account hereAvith filed.” By an oversight, no itemized statement was filed with the petition, nor was one on file when the trial1 began. Defendant demurred to the petition on the ground that it failed to state facts constituting a cause of action, and after the overruling of the demurrer, filed answer.…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Ethridge v. PerrymanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1963
- Lindsey v. NagelMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Merkle v. PoweMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912