Cates v. Nickell
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Dade Circuit Court. I. The verdict did not support the judgment, and was not in conformity to the provisions of the statute in such cases.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Dade Circuit Court. I. The verdict did not support the judgment, and was not in conformity to the provisions of the statute in such cases. (Gen. Stat. 1865, pp. 674-5, §§ 21, 26 ; Dysart’s Adm’r v. Austin et al., 36 Mo. 47, and cases cited; Branstetter v. Rives et al., 34 Mo. 318, and cases there cited.) I. If a judgment upon a promissory note be irregular for lack of assessment of plaintiff’s damage by the jury, yet it is such an irregularity or omission as does not prejudice the defendant, and will not be sufficient to reverse tbe case. (Gren. Stat. 1865, p. 671, § 19; 15 Mo.…
1Opinion of the Court
Fago-, Judge,
delivered tbe opinion of tbe court
This action was instituted, in tbe Dade Circuit Court, upon a promissory note. Tbe answer simply denied tbe execution of tbe note, and, tbe cause being submitted to a jury, tbe following verdict was rendered: £< We, tbe jury, find tbe issue in favor of tbe plaintiff.” Tbe jury being thereupon discharged, tbe court proceeded to ascertain tbe amount then due upon tbe note, including principal and interest, and rendered judgment for tbe same. Upon an appeal to tbe District Court, this judgment was affirmed, and tbe defendant, Nickell, has again…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Home Trust Co. v. JosephsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1936
- Johnson v. GraysonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- Sonnesyn v. AkinNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905
- Burghart v. BrownSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Locher v. KuechenmiesterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.