See v. Cox
Supreme Court of Missouri
«Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. On the 18th of July, 1851, the appellants instituted a civil action in the Common Pleas Court of St. Louis county. Then’ petition charged the respondent with executing a note annexed to the petition, and prayed judgment against him, for the amount of the note.
Read the full summary
«Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. On the 18th of July, 1851, the appellants instituted a civil action in the Common Pleas Court of St. Louis county. Then’ petition charged the respondent with executing a note annexed to the petition, and prayed judgment against him, for the amount of the note. The note was in the words and figures following, viz : “$1,318 98-100. Philadelphia, Aug. 14, 1850. Six months^after date, we, the subscriber, residing in Hannibal, ■ — -county, state of Missouri, promise to pay to the order of See, Brother & Co. thirteen hundred and thirteen dollars 98-100,…
1Opinion of the CourtGamble, Judge
*168The petition in this case alleges, that the defendant, by Ms promissory note,, thereto annexed, promised, for value received, to pay plaintiffs, &c. The note appears to be signed “ J. W. Rhodes, by his attorney M. B. Cox.”
The allegation in the petition is to be examined and construed, under the direction of the 5th section of article 7th of the Code, which directs that, “ in the construction of a pleading, for the purpose of determining its effect, its allegations shall be liberally construed, with a view to substantial justice between the parties.” The proper effect of the pleading, when a…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Alcorn v. Chicago & Alton RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Midway National Bank & Trust Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1921
- Gates v. WatsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Moberly v. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Butts v. LongMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.