McHoney v. German Insurance
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Montgomery Circuit Court. — Hon. E. M. Hughes, Judge. (1) The motion to dismiss should have been sustained, for the reason that the policy sued on was not filed. Rothwell v. Morgan, 37 Mo. 107; Railroad v. Knuds on, 62 Mo. 570. (2) The defendant’s objection to the introduction of any evidence in the case and its specific objection to the introduction of the policy should have been sustained. The policy was not on file and was not identified in any respect.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Montgomery Circuit Court. — Hon. E. M. Hughes, Judge. (1) The motion to dismiss should have been sustained, for the reason that the policy sued on was not filed. Rothwell v. Morgan, 37 Mo. 107; Railroad v. Knuds on, 62 Mo. 570. (2) The defendant’s objection to the introduction of any evidence in the case and its specific objection to the introduction of the policy should have been sustained. The policy was not on file and was not identified in any respect. (3) The application for insurance is a written, unilateral contract on part of plaintiff. The motion to dismiss was…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
This action is brought by petition founded upon an instrument of writing charged to have been executed by defendant. The instrument is not filed with the petition, nor is it alleged therein to be lost or destroyed. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the *220case, based on such ground, was overruled. The instrument sued upon is a policy of fire insurance charged to have been executed by defendant. ■ The motion should have been sustained. Hannibal & St. Joseph Ry. Co. v. Knudson, 62 Mo. 569; Rothwell v. Morgan, 37 Mo. 107; Dyer v. Murdock, 38 Mo. 224; Peake v. Bell, 65 Mo. 224, and cases cited.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad v. KnudsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Rothwell v. MorganSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Peake v. BellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Hook v. MurdochSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866