Oglebay v. Corby
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — EEon. T. A. Gill, Judge. A reversal of this judgment is asked because of the refusal of the court to give the instructions asked by defendant, for its refusal to grant a new trial, and because the verdict and judgment are so grossly against the weight of evidence as to shock the moral sense and to show that the court below could not have come to the conclusion except from oversight, partiality or prejudice.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — EEon. T. A. Gill, Judge. A reversal of this judgment is asked because of the refusal of the court to give the instructions asked by defendant, for its refusal to grant a new trial, and because the verdict and judgment are so grossly against the weight of evidence as to shock the moral sense and to show that the court below could not have come to the conclusion except from oversight, partiality or prejudice. (1) The herdics were sold and delivered at an agreed price, more than a month prior to the incorporation of the herdic company. The answer claims that…
1Opinion of the CourtNorton, C. J.
This action is to recover the sum of $2,484.40 for four herdic coaches alleged to have been sold and delivered to defendants on the fifteenth of July, 1881. Defendants in their answer set up that the sale *287and purchase of said coaches was made in view of a corporation thereafter to be formed and which was in fact organized and incorporated on the seventeenth of August, 1881. It avers that on or about the twelfth of July, 1881, defendants entered into a contract in writing with plaintiff whereby they promised and agreed to become responsible to plaintiff in proportion to the number of shares of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bott v. WoodMississippi Supreme Court · 1878
- Hays v. BaylissSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
3Cited by2 opinions
- Coats v. LynchSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Proffer v. MillerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897