Herndon v. Ford, No. 9042
| Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
| Writing for the Court | STONE; TITUS, P.J., and HOGAN |
| Citation | 470 S.W.2d 168 |
| Parties | A. C. HERNDON and Jewell Herndon, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Roy FORD and Aleeta Ford, Defendants-Respondents. |
| Decision Date | 05 August 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 9042 |
Page 168
v.
Roy FORD and Aleeta Ford, Defendants-Respondents.
Harold L. Henry, West Plains, for plaintiffs-appellants.
Moore & Brill, West Plains, for defendants-respondents.
STONE, Judge.
In this jury-tried action for rentals reserved under a written lease agreement for a term of one year, plaintiffs A. C. Herndon and Jewell Herndon, husband and wife, as lessors, sought to recover rentals for eleven months in the aggregate sum of $1,650 from defendants Roy Ford and Aleeta Ford, husband and wife, both of whom were named in the lease agreement as lessees. However, as was developed in the course of plaintiffs' presentation upon trial, defendant Roy not only executed the lease agreement on his own behalf but also undertook so to do on behalf of defendant Aleeta by signing her name on the instrument. Adverse evidentiary rulings (of which vigorous and persuasive complaint is made in plaintiffs' brief here) having frustrated plaintiffs' counsel in his efforts to show that defendant Roy was authorized so to execute the lease agreement on his wife's behalf, the separate motion of defendant Aleeta Ford for a directed verdict at the close of plaintiffs' evidence was sustained. At the close of all the evidence, the case as to defendant Roy Ford was submitted to the jury, which returned the following verdict: 'We, the jury, find the issues in favor of the plaintiffs and assess plaintiffs' damages at $ One Dollar,' upon which (so the transcript states) 'judgment was then entered as follows . . ..' After preliminary recitals reflecting the appearances of the parties and counsel and the impaneling of the jury, the remainder
Page 169
of the record entry captioned 'Decree' is as follows:'The plaintiffs offer evidence and rest. A motion of defendant Alleta (sic) Ford for a directed verdict is sustained; motion for a directed verdict filed by defendant Roy Ford is overruled. Defendant Roy Ford, offers his evidence and rests. Defendant's motion for a directed verdict at close of all the evidence is overruled. The jury is instructed in writing; the parties by their attorneys present their arguments and the cause is submitted to the jury for deliberation.
'The jury returns its verdict in favor of plaintiffs, assessing damages for plaintiffs at $1.00. The Court enters its judgment upon the verdict for plaintiffs in the sum of $1.00, against the defendant Roy Ford.
'WHEREFORE, it is the order and judgment of this Court that the plaintiffs, A. C. Herndon and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. Williams, No. 9121
...judgment from which an appeal may be taken. McCoy v. Simpson, supra, 344 Mo. at 217, 125 S.W.2d at 834(1); Herndon v. Ford, Mo.App., 470 S.W.2d 168. 1 --------------- 1 Accord: People ex rel. Pickerill v. New York Central R. Co., 391 Ill. 377, 63 N.E.2d 405, 407(8); State v. Griffin, 281 Al......
-
Curtis v. Curtis, Nos. 9205
...State ex rel. Beeler v. City of Raytown, Mo., 439 S.W.2d 481; Williams v. Williams, Mo.App., 480 S.W.2d 525; Herndon v. Ford, Mo.Ap. 470 S.W.2d 168. Defendant has suggested the judgment is not final, and inferentially at least, the appeal on Count I is The right of appeal is purely statutor......
-
Lawrence v. Steadley Co., Inc., No. 10649
...Beeler v. City of Raytown, 439 S.W.2d 481, 482(2) (Mo.1969); Wallace v. Hankins, 541 S.W.2d 82, 84(4) (Mo.App.1976); Herndon v. Ford, 470 S.W.2d 168, 169 2 Rule 74.01, V.A.M.R.; Elliott v. Harris, 423 S.W.2d 831, 832(1) (Mo. banc 1968); New Age Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n. v. Miller, 461......
-
City of Sikeston v. Missouri Utilities Co., No. 9543
...not appealable. State v. Henderson, 493 S.W.2d 31 (Mo.App.1973); Williams v. Williams, 480 S.W.2d 525 (Mo.App.1972), and Herndon v. Ford, 470 S.W.2d 168 (Mo.App.1971). What was said in the above three cases is equally applicable here, and it would serve no useful purpose to We hold that nei......
-
Williams v. Williams, No. 9121
...judgment from which an appeal may be taken. McCoy v. Simpson, supra, 344 Mo. at 217, 125 S.W.2d at 834(1); Herndon v. Ford, Mo.App., 470 S.W.2d 168. 1 --------------- 1 Accord: People ex rel. Pickerill v. New York Central R. Co., 391 Ill. 377, 63 N.E.2d 405, 407(8); State v. Griffin, 281 Al......
-
Curtis v. Curtis, Nos. 9205
...State ex rel. Beeler v. City of Raytown, Mo., 439 S.W.2d 481; Williams v. Williams, Mo.App., 480 S.W.2d 525; Herndon v. Ford, Mo.Ap. 470 S.W.2d 168. Defendant has suggested the judgment is not final, and inferentially at least, the appeal on Count I is The right of appeal is purely statutor......
-
Lawrence v. Steadley Co., Inc., No. 10649
...Beeler v. City of Raytown, 439 S.W.2d 481, 482(2) (Mo.1969); Wallace v. Hankins, 541 S.W.2d 82, 84(4) (Mo.App.1976); Herndon v. Ford, 470 S.W.2d 168, 169 2 Rule 74.01, V.A.M.R.; Elliott v. Harris, 423 S.W.2d 831, 832(1) (Mo. banc 1968); New Age Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n. v. Miller, 461......
-
City of Sikeston v. Missouri Utilities Co., No. 9543
...not appealable. State v. Henderson, 493 S.W.2d 31 (Mo.App.1973); Williams v. Williams, 480 S.W.2d 525 (Mo.App.1972), and Herndon v. Ford, 470 S.W.2d 168 (Mo.App.1971). What was said in the above three cases is equally applicable here, and it would serve no useful purpose to We hold that nei......