Legal Opinion

Beaty v. Cruce

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 25, 1918PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to tlie Cedar Connty Circuit Court. — Hon. Berry G. Thurman, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtBradley, J.

— Action for money had and received. The answer is a general denial and a plea of the five year Statute of Limitations. Upon trial below before the court without the intervention of a jury, judgment went for the defendant on the ground that plaintiff’s cause was barred by the five-year statute; and plaintiff brings the case to this court by writ of error.

September 15, 1910, plaintiff entered into a contract with one T. J. Hallam a real estate broker to purchase a section of land in Kearney county, Kansas, for $2100. Hallam was indebted to both plaintiff and defendant, and it was agreed all…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bent v. PriestSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
  2. Ripley v. WitheeTexas Supreme Court · 1863
  3. Central Bank v. ThayerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
  4. Frank v. OrganMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
  5. Scott & Bowker v. BoswellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Home Insurance v. Mercantile Trust Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1926
  2. Brown v. GrinsteadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1923
  3. State Ex Rel. H. K. Porter Co. v. NangleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1966
  4. Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Askew Saddlery Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1923

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API