Camden & Co. v. Steam Boat Georgia
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to the circuit- court of St. Louis county. By the record and assignment of errors in this case, these-two questions are presented for the consideration of this court *St’ c0'mP^a^nt against the boat defective or insufficient, either in form or substance 1 2nd.-Did the court .err in rescinding its order-granting Ieave to the plaintiff to amend; or in other words, can a complaint under the statute against a steam boat be amended? 1st. By the statute authorising…
Read the full summary
Error to the circuit- court of St. Louis county. By the record and assignment of errors in this case, these-two questions are presented for the consideration of this court *St’ c0'mP^a^nt against the boat defective or insufficient, either in form or substance 1 2nd.-Did the court .err in rescinding its order-granting Ieave to the plaintiff to amend; or in other words, can a complaint under the statute against a steam boat be amended? 1st. By the statute authorising proceedings against steam boats, it is required, that the complaint shall set forth the plaintiffs demand in all its…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court delivered by
Tompkins Judge.
Camden & Co., under the provisions of the act of 19th of March 1835, p. 102, of the digest of that year, commenced their action against the steam boat Georgia in the circuit court of St. Louis county, and that court having given judgment against them, they prosecute their writ of error to-reverse that judgment.
The first count in the declaration contains a statement, that the master and commander of the steam boat Georgia, lying at Pittsburg, received on board of said boat, 16 bales of dry goods, one bale of dry goods, one cask hard ware, one box…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Gibbons v. Steamboat Fanny BarkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Clark v. Steamboat Mound CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1845