Legal Opinion

Kuhn v. Schwartz

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 4, 1889PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. Turner A. Gill, Judge. The main question in this case is as to substitution of oral for written evidence. The only objection urged at the trial against the admission of evidence was that the same was not the best evidence of which tin case was in its nature susceptible, but secondary evidence.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. Turner A. Gill, Judge. The main question in this case is as to substitution of oral for written evidence. The only objection urged at the trial against the admission of evidence was that the same was not the best evidence of which tin case was in its nature susceptible, but secondary evidence. One of the four “general rules as to relevancy” o£ evidence is thus stated by Greenleaf: “The best evidence of which the case in its nature is susceptible must always be produced.” Greenl. on Ev. [13 Ed.] p. 66, secs. 50, 82, 85,88. Defendant objected to…

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.

The plaintiff in his petition alleged “ that said indebtedness, together with the goods and effects of Goldsmith and Kuhn, were assigned for the benefit of their creditors to one Leopold Wallach ; that Wallach, as assignee, with Goldsmith and Kuhn, subsequently assigned said claim to Citroen & Co., a firm composed of plaintiff and Lewis B. Citroen ; that afterwards said Citroen died and his interest in said indebtedness was by his legal representatives assigned to plaintiff.” The defendant, by the general denial contained in his answer, put in issue these allegations of the petition. The…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Farrell's Administrator v. Brennan's AdministratrixSupreme Court of Missouri · 1862
  2. Boyer v. HamiltonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
  3. Price v. HuntSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
  4. Washington County v. St. Louis & Iron Mountain RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
  5. Carr v. CarrSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wheless v. Meyer-Schmid Grocer Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
  2. Close v. Independent Gravel Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API