Wing v. Campbell
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court. I. That the petition originally filed, does not set out or show oai its face any liability of Campbell to Wing. It does not sufficiently state the particulars of the plaintiff’s alleged demand, nor does it show by what right the plaintiff has to ask judgment against Campbell for ¿he debt or liability of a third party. II.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court. I. That the petition originally filed, does not set out or show oai its face any liability of Campbell to Wing. It does not sufficiently state the particulars of the plaintiff’s alleged demand, nor does it show by what right the plaintiff has to ask judgment against Campbell for ¿he debt or liability of a third party. II. The court below committed error in overruling the demurrer to plaintiff’s petition, and in refusings new trial. The Law Commissioner^ court being a court of record, should be governed by the same rules as those which-obtain in…
1Opinion of the CourtRyland, J.
This wás a suit in the Law Commissioner’s court, upon the following account:
“S®. Louis, April 10th, 1851.
Thomas Campbell, To A. IL Wing, Dr.
To board for Presley from March 23d to April 8th, making fourteen days, at one dollar per day.........•..................$14 00
To dressing and laying out corpse ........................... 5 00
$19 00.”
The defendant appeared, and filed his demurrer to the petition. The demurrer was overruled, and the defendant making no further answer, judgment was rendered for the plaintiff.
The defendant afterwards moved to set aside this judgment and grant a new trial;…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. MartinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- State v. MartinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
- State v. MergetMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908