Legal Opinion

Wilt v. Hammond

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 14, 1914PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from Greene County Circuit Court. — Hon. Arch A. Johnson, Judge. (1) Because this being a suit based in the petition upon a modification of the written contract, and there being an absolute absence of any evidence tending to show a consideration for said modification, plaintiff failed to make out his case and defendant’s demurrer should have been sustained. McFarland v. Heim, 127 Mo. 333; Wear v. Schmelzer, 92 Mo.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Greene County Circuit Court. — Hon. Arch A. Johnson, Judge. (1) Because this being a suit based in the petition upon a modification of the written contract, and there being an absolute absence of any evidence tending to show a consideration for said modification, plaintiff failed to make out his case and defendant’s demurrer should have been sustained. McFarland v. Heim, 127 Mo. 333; Wear v. Schmelzer, 92 Mo. App. 323; Gratb v. Mound City Roofing Tile Co., 121 Mo. App. 249'; Zerr v. King, 121 Mo. App. 292; Moomaw v. Emerson, 80 Mo. App. 322; Wilson v. Russler, 91 Mo. App. 281;…

1Opinion of the CourtSturgis, J.

This suit is for damages for breach ■of a written contract, alleged to .have been modified by parol, to sell ice to plaintiff during the year 1911. The ■defendants were manufacturers of ice and the plaintiff was contracting the same under his trade name for sale at retail. The written contract is as follows: “April 3, 1911. Hammond Brothers, party of the first part, agrees to furnish the Clinton Wilt Ice & Fuel Co., ■of Springfield, Mo., party of the second part, 800 tons (eight hundred tons) of ice at $4.50 per ton; this ice to be delivered to their wagons at such places as we may designate.…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Lingenfelder v. Wainwright Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1890
  2. Morrow v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
  3. McMahan v. GeigerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
  4. Macfarland v. HeimSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
  5. Reigart v. Manufacturers Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Tennessee Fertilizer Co. v. International Agr. Corp.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Mount Vernon Car Manufacturing Co. v. Hirsch Rolling Mill Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1920
  3. Green v. WhaleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
  4. Gee v. NiebergMissouri Court of Appeals · 1973
  5. Davis v. CulmerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1927

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API