Knapp v. Hanley
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Eon. Wm. M. Kinsey, Judge. (1) All of the instructions given by the court tender plaintiff’s theory of the case to the jury. These instructions are to be considered in their entirety and not as though each separate instruction was intended to embody the whole law of the case, and if taken as a whole they fairly state the law applicable to the case; this is sufficient.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Eon. Wm. M. Kinsey, Judge. (1) All of the instructions given by the court tender plaintiff’s theory of the case to the jury. These instructions are to be considered in their entirety and not as though each separate instruction was intended to embody the whole law of the case, and if taken as a whole they fairly state the law applicable to the case; this is sufficient. McKeon v. Railway, 43 Mo. 405; O’Connell v. Railway, 106 Mo. 482; Meade v. Railway, 68 Mo-. App. 92; Yoegeli v. Marble & Granite Co., 56 Mo. App. 678; Minter v. Bradstreet Co., 174…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
In April, 1902, as representative of competing railroad companies for the control of the Wiggins Ferry Company, the Mercantile Trust Company and the Mississippi Valley Trust Company of St. Louis sent the stock of the Wiggins Ferry Company skyward, Charles Mullikin, a resident of the State of Virginia, owned one hundred and seven shares of the Wiggins Ferry Stock. For this stock he was wired an offer by the president of the Wiggins Ferry Company. On April 27, the plaintiff, who is his maternal uncle and at the time was his St. Louis business agent, wired him not to accept any offer for his…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State ex rel. Mills v. MastMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
3Cited by1 opinion
- Knapp v. HanleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910