Houghton v. Jacobs
Decision Date | 16 June 1922 |
Docket Number | No. 22804.,22804. |
Citation | 246 S.W. 285 |
Parties | HOUGHTON v. JACOBS |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; William C. Thomas, Judge.
Action by Geneva M. Houghton against Floyd E. Jacobs, administrator of Albert Beebe Houghton, deceased. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Cleary & Barnett, of Kansas City, for appellant.
Swearingen & Finnell, B. F. Halstead, and Thomas Deacy, all of Kansas City, for respondent.
This proceeding originated in the probate court of Jackson county, where plaintiff had judgment in the sum of $8,081.44 on a claim founded on a promissory note. An appeal was allowed and the cause tried de novo in the circuit court. The rulings made during the course of that trial are the subject of the present review.
In view of some of the questions that are raised, the opening statements of counsel to the jury become important, there having been no formal pleadings. The statement on the part of plaintiff, so far as it has a bearing upon the questions involved, was as follows;
The statement on behalf of defendant was to the effect that there was no consideration for the note, that the advances of money, if any, made by plaintiff to her son were gifts, and not loans, and that the note in suit was given by the son, just before entering the military service of the United States, in furtherance of a scheme on his part to deprive his wife, as to whom he was estranged, of any part of his estate.
Following the statements, plaintiff made proof of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Guthrie v. Gillespie
...conduct on the part of the plaintiff. Lampart v. Ins. Co., 199 S.W. 1020; Lampart v. Life & Fire Assur. Corp., 197 S.W. 100; Houghton v. Jacobs, 246 S.W. 285. J.W. Roberts, E.P. Stapleton and Cook & Cummins for (1) When a trial judge is dissatisfied with the weight of the evidence in a caus......
-
Shidloski v. New York, C. & St. L. R. Co.
... ... Cowart et al. (D. C.), 205 ... F. 316, 319; Frohman v. Lowenstein, 303 Mo. 339, 362, 260 ... S.W. 460)." [See, also, Houghtonwenstein, 303 Mo. 339, 362, 260 ... S.W. 460)." [See, also, Houghton v. Jacobs ... ...
-
Guthrie v. Gillespie
...conduct on the part of the plaintiff. Lampart v. Ins. Co., 199 S.W. 1020; Lampart v. Life & Fire Assur. Corp., 197 S.W. 100; Houghton v. Jacobs, 246 S.W. 285. W. Roberts, E. P. Stapleton and Cook & Cummins for respondent. (1) When a trial judge is dissatisfied with the weight of the evidenc......
-
Talley v. Richart
... ... Their testimony ... would have been only cumulative. [353 Mo. 919] The rule does ... not apply where the testimony is unnecessary. Houghton v ... Jacobs (Mo.), 246 S.W. 285. In this case the burden of ... proof as to the charge of fraud was on the defendants and ... until they made a ... ...