Love v. Van Every
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Creene Circuit Court. — Hov. W. F. Geiger, Judge. (1) The contract cannot be tortured into anything •other than a conditional release of the balance of the said ascertained indebtedness of Vam Every to Love, above what had been paid; and the release depended on defendant’s furnishing five hundred dollars to certain parties to buy plaintiff’s store and tie contract, and recognizing-said purchasers in plaintiff’s stead in said tie contract-'There is no pretense…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Creene Circuit Court. — Hov. W. F. Geiger, Judge. (1) The contract cannot be tortured into anything •other than a conditional release of the balance of the said ascertained indebtedness of Vam Every to Love, above what had been paid; and the release depended on defendant’s furnishing five hundred dollars to certain parties to buy plaintiff’s store and tie contract, and recognizing-said purchasers in plaintiff’s stead in said tie contract-'There is no pretense that these conditions were performed, but, on the contrary, the evidence is positive and undenied that performance was…
1Opinion of the CourtBrace, J.
This action was commenced in a justice’s court, upon an account as follows :
“Geo. S. Van Every in account with T. C. Love,—
Dec. 21, 1882. To 140 R. R. ties, 25c. each. .$352 00
“ “ “ “123 “ “ 11c. each.. 13 53
$365 53
By cash ... 309 70
Balance due 5?
*577Plaintiff recovered judgment in the justice’s court. Defendant appealed to the circuit court, where, upon the trial, the defendant demurred to plaintiff’s evidence. The demurrer was sustained, and the jury, under the instructions of the court, returned a verdict for the defendant, and judgment was accordingly rendered in his favor, from which…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Whipple v. BakerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Chapman v. AdamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1920
- W. T. Furguson Lumber Co. v. ElliottSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1934