Holliday v. Jones

• Decision Date: 31 March 1875
• Citation: 59 Mo. 482
• Parties: JESSE HOLLIDAY, Respondent, v. JONATHAN JONES, Appellant.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

59 Mo. 482

JESSE HOLLIDAY, Respondent,

v.JONATHAN JONES, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March Term, 1875.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court.

D. T. Jewett, and W. H. Horner, for Appellant.

H. D. Laughlin, for Respondent.

WAGNER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This suit was brought originally before a justice of the peace, on a promissory note dated Oct. 6, 1859, for two hundred and fifty dollars. The defense was payment. After a trial in the justice's court, the case was taken to the Circuit Court, where the plaintiff had judgment under an instruction that there was no evidence to sustain the defense.

It will be necessary to give a summary of the facts in order to determine whether the instruction should have been granted. It appears, that in the spring of 1859, Jas. M. Hughes, Thos. Marshall, Dr. Sanderson, Jesse Holliday-- the plaintiff--and the Sigersons had a claim on, or were interested in, what was known as the “Sigerson Nursery Tract,” near the city of St. Louis. For the purpose of disposing of this land, and applying the proceeds to the respective parties in interest, they all conveyed the same to W. T. Wood and R. S. Hart, as trustees. The trustees divided the land in lots, and at a sale had by them, the defendant purchased two lots, at the price of one thousand dollars, two hundred and fifty of which he paid in cash, and gave his three several notes for the same amount, due respectively, in one, two and three years. The note now sued on is the last note due.

The parties interested in the property bought largely at the sale, and after the sale they concluded that they would like to have the lots bought by defendant, to square out some of their other purchases. They then requested Hart to negotiate for a re-conveyance to them of his lots, and a return of his money and the notes that he had given for the deferred payments. Hart succeeded in finally effecting the arrangement, and defendant re-conveyed the lots and received back the money that he had paid. By agreement defendant conveyed the lots to Hughes, but he never received either of the notes; and after nearly eleven years, Holliday, the plaintiff, has brought suit on the last one.

The only witnesses in the case were Hart--the trustee--and the defendant. Hart, in his deposition, says that some time after the trustees made the deed he was applied to by Sanderson and Marshall, to procure from the defendant a transfer of his purchase to Hughes, Marshall, Sanderson and Holliday--the plaintiff.--All these parties having large claims on the Sigerson Tract, amounting to some $80,000 or $100,000, had bid in pretty largely at the sale, and they regarded it as desirable...