Beckwith v. Boyce
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR TO ST. LOUIS CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The judgment below is erroneous because it is for a greater sum than is laid in plaintiffs declaration. 2 Blackford 459, Johnson vs. Hawkins; 3 Blackford 133, Phillips vs. Nichols ; U. S. Digest, vol. 2 ; p. 665 ; 2 Howard’s Mo. Rep. 686, Potter vs. Prescott. . 2. Where ajudgment in an action of assumpsit is for a greater sum than the damages laid in the declaration it is error. 1 Mo. Rep. 615, Johnson vs. Robertson; Carr §e.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO ST. LOUIS CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The judgment below is erroneous because it is for a greater sum than is laid in plaintiffs declaration. 2 Blackford 459, Johnson vs. Hawkins; 3 Blackford 133, Phillips vs. Nichols ; U. S. Digest, vol. 2 ; p. 665 ; 2 Howard’s Mo. Rep. 686, Potter vs. Prescott. . 2. Where ajudgment in an action of assumpsit is for a greater sum than the damages laid in the declaration it is error. 1 Mo. Rep. 615, Johnson vs. Robertson; Carr §e. Vs. Edwards, 1 Mo. R. 137¡; Maupin vs. Triplett, 5 Mo, R. 422. 1. The only mode of taking advantage of a merely defective or…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Napton
delivered the opinion of the court.
In this case the damages found by the jury, exceeded those laid in the declaration, and the judgment was in accordance with the verdict. There was no motion in arrest in the court below. In accordance with the previous decisions of this court, the judgment must be reversed. Carr vs. Edwards I Mo. R. 137.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Weller v. Missouri Lumber & Mining Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Higgs v. HuntSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881