Cavin v. Smith
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Polk Circuit Court. Action for the conversion of a mare. The defendants purchased the mare at a constable’s sale under an execution in their favor against one Ray. At the trial, the defendants offered evidence of admissions by the plaintiff that he had sold the mare to Ray. The plaintiff, in rebuttal, offered to prove declarations of Ray that the sale to him was upon a condition, and that the condition had never been complied with.
Read the full summary
Error to Polk Circuit Court. Action for the conversion of a mare. The defendants purchased the mare at a constable’s sale under an execution in their favor against one Ray. At the trial, the defendants offered evidence of admissions by the plaintiff that he had sold the mare to Ray. The plaintiff, in rebuttal, offered to prove declarations of Ray that the sale to him was upon a condition, and that the condition had never been complied with. This evidence was excluded, tbe plaintiff excepted, and, after a ver-dict and judgment against him, sued out this writ o£ error. that there "was error -in…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, Judge
The court should have admitted the testimony of the witmess, Mayfield. The defendant’s atfswer to the action, as appears from the evidence, though not in the pleadings, rested on the assumption that Ray was the owner of the mare. Now, it 'is a settled rule of law that a party cannot create evidence for himself. Yet he may, by his acts and declarations, make evidence against himself. If Ray was the owner of the mare, although he could not confirm or strengthen his title by his own declarations, yet his declarations may weaken or disprove his ¿title. The possessor of property, nothing more…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- O'Hanlon v. PerrySupreme Court of Missouri · 1846
3Cited by4 opinions
- Darrett v. DonnellySupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
- Vermillion v. LeClareMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Diel v. StegnerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894
- Vermillion v. ParsonsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903