Fallis v. Gray
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Eon. Wariwelc Hough, Judge. Plaintiff sues on an express promise to repay, bnt the judgment is on quantum meruit, a different theory altogether, which is not permissible. Hess v. Corwin, 109 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Eon. Wariwelc Hough, Judge. Plaintiff sues on an express promise to repay, bnt the judgment is on quantum meruit, a different theory altogether, which is not permissible. Hess v. Corwin, 109 Mo. App. 24. There -was no consideration for appellant’s alleged promise, claimed to have been made long after contract of tenancy, to refund the $15. And such promise ivas not a part of the original contract of letting because plaintiff says himself he did not request refund until a week or more after he had paid the rent. I-Iaseltine v. Ausherman, 87 Mo. 410.…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
(after stating the facts). — The defendant raises three points against the judgment: first, that the plaintiff sued on an express promise to repay him and got judgment on a quantum meruit; second, that there was no consideration for the promise to repay, which was not given as part of the original contract of letting, but a week or more later; third, that the finding for plaintiff is excessive; as, in any event, he would be entitled only to an amount equal to the rent from September 1st to September 13th, which, amount would be $6..The statement does not necessarily declare on a promise by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Smith v. NiverNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Cartledge v. CrespoCity of New York Municipal Court · 1893
- Page v. EllsworthNew York Supreme Court · 1865
- Irwin v. LawrenceNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1857