Carr v. Card
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. I. The petition in this case does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. It does not show that the defendants, appellants here, were in any manner connected with the indebtedness of the steamboat, either as owners or otherwise. The instrument sued on is not a specialty and imports no consideration.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. I. The petition in this case does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. It does not show that the defendants, appellants here, were in any manner connected with the indebtedness of the steamboat, either as owners or otherwise. The instrument sued on is not a specialty and imports no consideration. There being no evidence to show that defendants were in any manner connected with the indebtedness of the boat as owners of any interest therein, there does not appear any consideration for the instrument on which the action is based. II.…
1Opinion of the CourtDryden, Judge
This was a suit by the payees against the payors, founded on the following instrument of writing, viz :
“ Whereas there is due to Carr & Kennett for supplies and materials furnished the steamboat Duncan S. Carter, the sum of three hundred and one dollars, for which said Carr & Kennett have a lien on said steamboat, her engines, machinery and appurtenances; and whereas the time in which said lien can be enforced under the statutes against the same is about to and will soon expire ; now we, the undersigned, William H. Card and William H. Eads, in consideration of said Carr & Kennett (which firm…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Chenoweth v. Pacific Express Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- Homan v. Steele, Johnson & Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1886
- State ex rel. Shawhan v. EllisonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
- McNulty v. Kansas CityCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1919
- Bolles v. BirdColorado Court of Appeals · 1898
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.