Doerge v. Heimenz
Missouri Court of Appeals
Error to the St. Louis Circuit Court. No cause of action is presented ; the facts alleged show that the claim based thereon is barred by the Statute of Limitations.— The State to use v. Bird, 22 Mo. 470 ; Boyd v. Ghristy, 47 Mo. 70.
1Opinion of the Court
■Hayden, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
This case has been here before, and is reported 1 Mo. App. 238. Upon the new trial there was an agreed statement of facts, and from this it appears that the plaintiff lent to the intestate, Horst, and his partner, Brusselbach, sums of money at different times, the last item being of date January 5, 1867 ; that the partners hired' the plaintiff, and that he *256was in their service from September 5, 1866, to August 5* 1867, at $20 a month; that Brusselbach paid to plaintiff $50 on May 10, 1868, and that Horst paid to the plaintiff* on May 12, 1868,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Boyd v. HurlbutSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Stiles v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Wiggins v. Adm'r of LoveringSupreme Court of Missouri · 1845
- Inhabitants of Bridgeton v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1864
- Doerge v. HeimenzMissouri Court of Appeals · 1876
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hart v. WoodMissouri Court of Appeals · 1965