Legal Opinion
Robinson v. Robinson
Missouri Court of Appeals
Decided October 16, 1888PublishedCited by 4 opinions
Error to the PiJce Circuit Court. — Hon. E. M. Hughes, Judge. The rule that plea in bar waives dilatory pleas, has been changed by the statute. R. S. 1879, secs. 3513 and 3522'; Little v. Harrington, 71 Mo. 390 ; Egler v. Jones, 79 Mo. 261; Thorngoson v. Bronson, 17 Mo. App. 456.
1Opinion of the CourtPeers, J.
Plaintiff, on the twenty-seventh day of April, 1886, commenced suit in the circuit court of Pike county against the defendant on two notes of five hundred dollars each. The petition is in the usual form. Defendant filed an answer to the petition admitting the execution of the notes and averring their payment and discharge, together with several other defenses set out in the pleadings. The answer then concludes with the following averment:
“Defendant further answering says that he is informed and believes that the plaintiff never authorized the institution of this suit, that she is not now…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Keith v. WilsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1840
- Vallé v. PictonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1884
3Cited by4 opinions
- State ex rel. Ponath v. MuenchSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- Munhall v. MitchellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Barkley Cemetery Ass'n v. McCuneMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- Institute of Educational Travel v. BinkerdAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1915