Ivory v. Carlin
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Si. Louis Circuit Cowrt. I. The petition, though awkwardly worded, was sufficient. (See 23 Mo. 254.) The motion in arrest was properly overruled. It is doubtful if such a motion now exists. (3 Abb. P. R. 428 ; 8 How. Pr. R. 160 ; 3 Seld. 576.) The verdict cured the defect, if any. The objection should have been made at the trial.
1Opinion of the CourtEwing, Judge
This was an action on a promissory note for six hundred dollars by the respondent as endorsee, of which Carlin was the maker, payable to his own order, and English the endorser. There was a trial by the court without a jury and judgment for the respondent. A motion in arrest of judgment being overruled, the cause is brought here by appeal.
The only question is as to the sufficiency of the petition, which alleges that the defendant Carlin by his promissory note, herewith filed, dated St. Louis, June 4,1857, promised, for value received, to pay to his own order, four months after the date…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Cartwright v. Liberty Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Meyers v. FieldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866