McDermott v. Claas
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from 81. Louis City Circuit Court. — -How. L. BYallí ant, Judge. (1) The claim of appellant that the petition was bad as not stating facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action has been made with sufficient definiteness in the motions for a new trial and- in arrest. But even if such claim had been lacking in definiteness as in said motions filed, or not made at all in the case, it would not be lost, but could be made in this court for the first time.
Read the full summary
Appeal from 81. Louis City Circuit Court. — -How. L. BYallí ant, Judge. (1) The claim of appellant that the petition was bad as not stating facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action has been made with sufficient definiteness in the motions for a new trial and- in arrest. But even if such claim had been lacking in definiteness as in said motions filed, or not made at all in the case, it would not be lost, but could be made in this court for the first time. Bateson v. Clark, 37 Mo. 31 (construing R. S., sec. 2302 ; Tapley ». Watson, 38 Mo. 489 ; Iba v. Railroad, 45 Mo. 475; McQrady v.…
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
— Godfrey Fritz, in March, 1886, contracted with Charles Claas to erect a three-story, brick *19building on a lot belonging to the latter in the city of St. Louis, and plaintiff, as subcontractor under Fritz, agreed to do and did do the brick work, and this action was brought against Fritz to recover the value of the work, and against Claas to foreclose a mechanic's lien against the building and the lot on which it stood, the amount claimed being $2,514.
The case was tried by the court without a jury. Judgment went against Fritz personally for $2,758.70, that being the principal and interest of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Rude v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Dailey v. HoustonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Hilliker v. FranciscoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Ferrenbach v. TurnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- Spurlock v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1887
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Roy F. Stamm Electric Co. v. Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1943
- Ittner v. HughesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- Mitchell Planing Mill Co. v. AllisonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Duerst v. St. Louis Stamping Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Ladue Contracting Co. v. Land Development Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1960
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.