Maguire v. Conran
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. 1. The statute excludes this defence.— R. L., 105, sec. 4; ^Green’s N. I, Rep., p. 1; 4 Halstead, 130, 134, under a similar statute. 2. The plea is not good. It is not a plea of no consideration, for one is shown: it is not a valid plea of a failure of consideration, for that, such as it was, was executed. It amounts simply to a partial failure only, if any thing, for the party has still the use and possession of what he purchased.
Read the full summary
ERROR to St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. 1. The statute excludes this defence.— R. L., 105, sec. 4; ^Green’s N. I, Rep., p. 1; 4 Halstead, 130, 134, under a similar statute. 2. The plea is not good. It is not a plea of no consideration, for one is shown: it is not a valid plea of a failure of consideration, for that, such as it was, was executed. It amounts simply to a partial failure only, if any thing, for the party has still the use and possession of what he purchased. It does not aver that the party had no right whatever, nor does it set out such facts as that, if judgment be given for…
1Opinion of the CourtTompkins, Judge
John Maguire sued James Conran in the Court of Common Pleas, and judgment being there given against him, he now prosecutes his writ of error to reverse that judgment.. The suit was brought on a note made payable to the order of Robert N. Moore, for value received, without defalcation or discount, and the note was assigned to Maguire by the payee.
The maker of the note pleaded that the note in the petition mentioned was made and given by the defendant to the said Moore, for the sole consideration that the said Moore, at, &c., did sell and assign to the defendant a certain license and right to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Maupin v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1842