Wright v. Broome
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. James E. Witheow, Judge. (1) Where services are rendered and expenses incurred under a misunderstanding between the parties as to the terms of compensation therefor, as to which the minds of the parties have never met, the party rendering the services and incurring the expense is entitled to recover a quamtum meruit therefor under an implied contract, or “quasi contract,” for proper compensation.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. James E. Witheow, Judge. (1) Where services are rendered and expenses incurred under a misunderstanding between the parties as to the terms of compensation therefor, as to which the minds of the parties have never met, the party rendering the services and incurring the expense is entitled to recover a quamtum meruit therefor under an implied contract, or “quasi contract,” for proper compensation. Turner v. Webster, 24 Kan. 38; Tucker v. Preston, 60 Vt. 473; Constable v. Lefever, 21 N. Y. Supp. 38; Cad-man v. Markle, 76 Mich. 448; Wonsettler…
1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.
On the sixth day of April, 1883, the defendant Broome instituted a replevin suit against the plaintiff to recover the possession of two race horses, viz.: a black filly named “Black G-al,” and a sorrel filly known as the “Bass filly.” The defense was that Wright owned an undivided half interest in the horses. The case was tried at the October term of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, and resulted in a verdict and judgment for Broome. In the present case the entire record in the replevin suit, which included the testimony taken at the trial and the instructions, was read in evidence,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cadman v. MarkleMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Lapham v. OsborneNevada Supreme Court · 1888
- Suits v. TaylorMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Davidson v. BiermannMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Tucker v. PrestonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1887
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Nibler v. ColtraneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1955
- Gregory v. WoodberySupreme Court of Florida · 1907
- Nibler v. ColtraneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1955