Rogers v. Mercantile Adjuster Publishing Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. The fifst instruction given for respondents, in that it authorized the jury to find for them on their pleadings in evidence without any consideration of the pleadings and evidence of appellants, was error; it purported to cover the whole case, hut entirely left out of consideration appellants’ defense. - It particularly left out of consideration the defense of appellant, Mercantile Adjuster, which was…
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. The fifst instruction given for respondents, in that it authorized the jury to find for them on their pleadings in evidence without any consideration of the pleadings and evidence of appellants, was error; it purported to cover the whole case, hut entirely left out of consideration appellants’ defense. - It particularly left out of consideration the defense of appellant, Mercantile Adjuster, which was not a party to the original sale to appellant, Ten Broek. Evans v. Railroad, 16 Mo. App. 522; Laughlin v. Gerardi, 67…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
(after stating the facts)'. — We consider that the judgment in this case is for the right party and that there is no defense to it on either the facts or the law. For proof of the supposed fraud in procuring the notes in suit, defendants relied on the testimony of Ten Broek that, in the negotiation for the compromise of the action instituted in New York for delinquent installments of the original purchase price of The Lawyer and Credit Man, plaintiffs represented that there were one thousand good live subscriptions to it; that he, Ten Broek, relied on this representation and laid it before…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Och v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Hunter, Evans & Co. v. LaniusTexas Supreme Court · 1892
- Estes v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- French v. FrenchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1892
- State ex rel. Harvey v. ManningSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Byerly v. Consolidated Light, Power & Ice Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Kane v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1913
- Bilby v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Goodman v. FreieMissouri Court of Appeals · 1924
- Williams Cooperage Co. v. BollingerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907