Burghart v. Brown

Decision Date31 May 1875
Citation60 Mo. 24
PartiesHENRY BURGHART Defendant in Error, v. HIRAM BROWN, Plaintiff in Error.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Error to Livingstone Circuit Court.

J. M. Davis, with H. M. Pollard, for Plaintiff in Error.

C. H. Mansur, for Defendant in Error.

NAPTON, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This case is in all respects like the case of Snadon's Adm'r vs. Nickell (42 Mo., 169).

In a suit on a note, the only defense was, that the defendant did not execute it, and there was a general verdict for the plaintiff. On this verdict the court entered a judgment for the amount of the note and interest, which it is plain, on the authority of the case cited, could not be done.

The judgment is therefore reversed and the cause remanded.

The other judges concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
38 cases
  • Home Trust Co. v. Josephson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 2, 1936
    ...error for the trial court to instruct the jury as to the amount of its verdict. Sec. 973, R.S. 1929; Cates v. Nickell, 42 Mo. 169; Burghart v. Brown, 60 Mo. 24; Poulson v. Collier, 18 Mo. App. 604; Ryors v. Prior, 31 Mo. App. 555; Dyer v. Combs, 65 Mo. App. 152; Corbitt v. Mooney, 84 Mo. Ap......
  • Sonnesyn v. Akin
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • May 20, 1905
    ... ... Van Benthuysen v. DeWitt (N.Y.) 4 Johns. 213; ... Cates v. Nickell, 42 Mo. 169; Burghart v ... Brown, 60 Mo. 24; Gerhab v. White, 40 N.J.L ... 242; Gaither v. Wilmer, 71 Md. 361, 18 A. 590, 5 L ... R. A. 756, 17 Am. St. Rep ... ...
  • Home Trust Co. v. Josephson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 2, 1936
    ...is not mentioned. Wells v. Zallee, was followed in Doud v. Reid, 53 Mo.App. 553 (1893), without noticing the Cates case. But in Burghart v. Brown, 60 Mo. 24 (May 1875), this court followed Cates, Admr., v. Nickell, without discussion and without noticing Wells v. Zallee. In the Burghart cas......
  • Johnson v. Grayson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 19, 1910
    ... ... therefor. Hahn v. Bradley, 92 Mo.App. 399; ... Wilson v. Riddler, 92 Mo.App. 335; Leavitt v ... Taylor, 163 Mo. 158; Brown v. Hoffelmeyer, 74 ... Mo.App. 385. (c) Under the evidence it was for the jury to ... say whether Johnson had taken the note as collateral to ... to the jury. [ Corbitt v. Mooney, 84 Mo.App. 645; ... Cates v. Nickell, 42 Mo. 169; Burghart v ... Brown, 60 Mo. 24.] Therefore, even if a peremptory ... instruction had been proper in this case, it should have ... directed the jury to ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT