Brown v. Farmer Motor Co.

• Decision Date: 23 May 1929
• Docket Number: No. 4554.,4554.
• Citation: 17 S.W.2d 615
• Parties: BROWN v. FARMER MOTOR CO.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

17 S.W.2d 615

BROWN v. FARMER MOTOR CO.

No. 4554.

Springfield Court of Appeals. Missouri.

May 23, 1929.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jasper County; S. W. Bates, Judge.

Action by Neal Brown against the Farmer Motor Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

P. E. Bingman and L. S. Dewey, both of Joplin, for appellant.

Foulke & Foulke, of Joplin, for respondent.

SMITH, J.

This is a suit in which the plaintiff alleged that he had been damaged $75 because the defendant sold him an automobile and agreed to deliver a certificate of title to the automobile and induced the plaintiff to expend the amount sued for in payments upon the automobile and for repairs thereon, and that the defendant breached its contract in that it failed to deliver a certificate of title to the automobile, although often requested to do so, and that the automobile was worthless to plaintiff without said certificate of title.

The suit was commenced in a justice of the peace court and no answer was filed by the defendant, but its theory of the case, as shown by the testimony, was that neither the automobile nor the certificate of title was to be delivered to the plaintiff until the amount of the purchase price was paid. The plaintiff contended that the automobile was sold to him for $160 and that he gave a note and mortgage for that amount, and that the defendant promised him the certificate of title, but that it was not delivered, although frequently demanded; that a part of the contract was that the plaintiff was to have the automobile painted and repaired and new tires to be placed thereon, all of which was to be done to strengthen the value of plaintiff's mortgage to defendant. The plaintiff contended that he spent $75 in compliance with his part of the contract, but that the defendant wholly failed to comply with its part by delivering the certificate of title, and plaintiff's suit was to recover the amount he had expended. Judgment was had by plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

The testimony of plaintiff as to the terms of the contract and the expenditures by him was submitted to the jury and was controverted by the testimony of the defendant, which made an issue of fact for the jury to determine, and since there was a controversy over the facts submitted to the jury, the verdict and judgment must stand unless there was error in the proceedings in the trial of the case.

The brief filed by defendant fails to comply with the provisions of rule 18 of this court in that it contains no assignment of errors. This rule should be followed, but the appeal will not be dismissed on account of this error.

Under Points and Authorities, the defendant only briefs one point mentioned in its ...