Edwards v. Giboney
| Decision Date | 31 October 1872 |
| Citation | Edwards v. Giboney, 51 Mo. 129 (Mo. 1872) |
| Parties | JAMES F. EDWARDS, Administrator of THOMAS B. ENGLISH, Respondent, v. ANDREW GIBONEY, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Cape Girardeau Court of Common Pleas.
L. Houck, for Appellant.
L. H. Davis, for Respondent.
This was an action for legal services, claimed to have been rendered by the plaintiff's intestate to the defendant, in many cases, to the amount of $450. The bill of particulars sets out fees for services, commencing in 1860 and 1861; in 1864 and 1865.
The defendant denied the employment of English in any of the cases, except the suit of Verges vs. Giboney and pleads payment for those services. The case of Verges vs. Giboney occurred in 1865, as set down in the bill of particulars.
On the trial the plaintiff introduced evidence tending to show, that English had rendered services in the suits set down in the bill of particulars, as occurring in 1861, 1864 and 1865; including the Verges case in 1865, amounting in the aggregate to $250, and judgment was rendered for that amount against the defendant.
On trial the defendant offered to read the following receipt as evidence, which was excluded by the court. “$20,--Received of Andrew Giboney twenty dollars, part of fees for attention to business for him, as attorney in sundry cases. December 9th, 1863.--Thomas B. English.
The exclusion of this receipt is...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co. v. Randolph Town-Site Co.
... ... plaintiff is not permitted to do. It can show nothing ... inconsistent with the facts set out in petition. Edwards ... v. De Bonney, 51 Mo. 129; Kuhn v. Weil, 73 Mo ... 213; Ramsey v. Henderson, 91 Mo. 560; Wilson v ... Abbott, 89 Mo. 537; Lennox v ... ...
-
Kiskaddon v. Jones
...Appeal from Franklin Circuit Court. J. C. Kiskaddon, pro se, cited: Boone Co. vs. Lowry, 9 Mo. 23; Currier vs. Lowe, 32 Mo. 369; Edwards vs. Giboney, 51 Mo. 129; Huston vs. Forsyth Scale Works, 56 Mo. 416; Eddy vs. Baldwin, 32 Mo. 369; Green vs. Gallagher, 35 Mo. 226; Weaver vs. Hendrick, 3......
-
The People's Bank v. Stewart
... ... A party will not be allowed to introduce evidence in support ... of a defense not set out in his answer. Currier v ... Lowe, 32 Mo. 203; Edwards v. Gibbony, 51 Mo ... 129; Russell v. Whitely, 59 Mo. 196; Kuhn v ... Weil, 73 Mo. 213; Weil v. Poston, 77 Mo. 284; ... Edgar v. Kupper, 110 ... ...
-
Citizens' Trust Co. v. Going
...668; Moore v. Renick, 95 Mo. App. 202, 210, 68 S. W. 936; Wilkerson v. Farnham, 82 Mo. 672, 678; Young v. Glascock, 79 Mo. 574; Edwards v. Giboney, 51 Mo. 129; 30 Cyc. 1253 and 1261; Henderson v. Davis, 74 Mo. App. 1, 5; Harrison v. Doyle, 163 Mo. App. 602, 605, 147 S. W. 504; State ex rel.......