Howe v. Mittelberg
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Ho». Walter B. Douglas, Judge. (1) The plaintiff is not the real party in interest and the contract sued on being a personal option can uot be assigned. Sec. 540, R. S. 1899. (2) If the writing without any other evidence shows a cause of action, the limitation is ten years, but if any other evidence than the writing has to be resorted to, to make out a case, the period is five years.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Ho». Walter B. Douglas, Judge. (1) The plaintiff is not the real party in interest and the contract sued on being a personal option can uot be assigned. Sec. 540, R. S. 1899. (2) If the writing without any other evidence shows a cause of action, the limitation is ten years, but if any other evidence than the writing has to be resorted to, to make out a case, the period is five years. Meneffe v. Arnold, 51 Mo. 536; Carr v. Thompson, 67 Mo. 472. (1) Appellant raises, for the first time in this court, the point that the plaintiff is not the real party…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
This action originated before a justice of the peace and is based on tbe following written contract:
“December 30, 1893.
“In consideration of tbe sum of $237.50, received tbis day of Selden P. Spencer, I bave sold and do sell to bim 250 shares of tbe capital stock, full paid and non-assessáble in tbe St. Louis Mining and Milling Company of Montana and agree to buy back tbe said stock at its cost price and at any time on five days’ notice after June 1, 1894, and before October 1, 1894.
“Arthur Mittelberg.
“Sept. 29, 1894: Extended to Jan’y 1, 1895.
“A. M.
“Dec. 26, 1894. Tbis guarantee is for tbe…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Guerney v. MooreSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Bridges v. StephensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- Young v. HudsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
- Reyburn v. CaseySupreme Court of Missouri · 1859
- Henoch v. ChaneySupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Continental Gin Co. v. ArnoldSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Himes v. HimesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
- Home Insurance v. Mercantile Trust Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1926
- Ball v. Peper Cotton Press Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- James v. Lederer-Strauss & Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1925
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.