Hoyle v. Farquharson
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court. — Hon. G. H. Burckhartt, Judge. There were five different causes of action stated in the petition, and the verdict being only on one was bad.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court. — Hon. G. H. Burckhartt, Judge. There were five different causes of action stated in the petition, and the verdict being only on one was bad. Mooney v. Kennett, 19 Mo. 552 ; Clark v. U. $• St.,J. R. R. Co., 36 Mo. 202; Pitts v. Fugate, 41 Mo. 405 ; State ex rel. v. Bulle, 35 Mo. 269; City of St. Louis v. Allen, 53 Mo. 44; Owens v. Railroad Co., 58 Mo. 386. cited R. S. 1879, § 3512; Williams v. Fischer, 50 Mo. 198; Kellogg v. Malin, 62 Mo. 429; Bunn v. Railroad Co., 68 Mo. 279; Reugger v. Lindenberger, 53 Mo. 364; Miss., etc., v. Presby. Church, 54 Mo. 524;…
1Opinion of the CourtHough, C. J.
The petition in this case contains five counts, each of which contains a distinct cause of action and a separate demand for damages. The court seems to have regarded the first four counts as constituting but a single cause of action and indeed but a single count and so instructed the jury. Thus instructed, the jury returned a verdict for the defendant on the first count, and found for *378the plaintiff on the second count the sum of $160. The defendant, having jileaded a set-off to what was designated by the court as the first count, the court inquired whether they intended to find any amount for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Marquis v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
3Cited by6 opinions
- Phillips v. Geiser Manufacturing Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Downing v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1897
- Taylor v. ShortMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Ham & Ham Lead & Zinc Investment Co. v. Catherine Lead Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1917
- Courtney v. KneibMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.