Elwood v. Heinz-Young Construction Company
| Decision Date | 05 May 1914 |
| Citation | 166 S.W. 1076,183 Mo.App. 289 |
| Parties | JOSEPH ELWOOD, Respondent, v. HEINZ-YOUNG CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.--Hon. Wm. B. Homer, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Judgment affirmed.
Evan A Smith for appellant.
The petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Leas v. The Pacific Express Co., 45 Mo.App. 508.
George W. Wellman for respondent.
The statement filed by respondent, as appears in appellant's abstract of record, is sufficient in the absence of a motion by respondent to make the statement more definite and certain and after trial and verdict rendered cannot be attacked. Fixture Co. v. Base Ball Co., 152 Mo.App. 601; Jarret v. Mohan, 142 Mo.App. 29; McReynolds v Railroad, 115 Mo.App. 676.
This is an action begun before a justice of the peace, where plaintiff had judgment. Upon defendant's appeal to the circuit court, and a trial de novo there, plaintiff again prevailed, and the case is here upon defendant's appeal.
The only point involved relates to the sufficiency of the statement, or account, filed before the justice of the peace. This instrument, as it appears before us in the record, begins: "Started to work for Heinz-Young Construction Company, Montana and Missouri avenues at the rate of sixty dollars per month." Then follows a list of amounts for which plaintiff gives credit as having been paid him upon various specified dates in the year 1911, amounting in all to $ 225. Then follows a heading, "Total amount due 1911;" following which are set out the various amounts claimed to have been earned during designated months of that year, the total thereof being $ 298. A further item of fifty cents occurs for "repair of bars;" making the balance, claimed to be due, $ 73.50. The paper is signed "Joseph Elwood."
There is some contention that plaintiff's name was not signed to the instrument until after the trial before the justice of the peace, but from the record before us, in which but little of the evidence is preserved, we cannot say that such was the case. Hence, we shall take the statement as we find it, without further comment as to the point thus sought to be made.
The instrument is not in the usual form of an account, and is quite informally drawn, but nevertheless it does show upon its face that plaintiff is claiming a...
To continue reading
Request your trial