Morrow v. Smith

• Decision Date: 31 January 1847
• Citation: Morrow v. Smith, 10 Mo. 308 (Mo. 1847)
• Parties: MORROW v. SMITH.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

10 Mo. 308

MORROW

v.SMITH.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

January Term, 1847.

APPEAL FROM HOLT CIRCUIT COURT.

WILSON & REES, for Appellant. That the court erred in permitting the evidence of the appellee to be given, and also in giving judgment without proof of the submission. In an action on an award it is necessary to prove the authority delegated by the parties to the arbitrators; if the authority be by deed, it must be produced, and the execution by all the parties to the reference proved. 2 Starkie's Ev. 137; Doe v. Bossier, 3 East, 15; Herbert v. Cook, Willes, 86.

EDWARDS & JONES, for Appellee. 1st. That the award of the arbitrators is binding upon both parties, unless the arbitrators have exceeded their authority, or been guilty of some fraud or improper conduct, to the prejudice of the appellant. 2nd. That substantial justice has been done in this case, the verdict and judgment having been rendered for the right party. 3rd. That where this court can see that the verdict and judgment have been given for the right party, upon the whole case, it will not reverse the judgment of the court below, unless substantial justice requires it, even although the proceedings of the court below may not have been in exact accordance with the technical rules of law. 9 Mo. R. 305, Maston v. Fanning. 4th. That this case having originated before a justice of the peace, where cases are decided according to law and equity, the greatest liberality ought to be extended in favor of the proceedings of the court below. 5th. That there is no error in the proceedings in the court below, and that its judgment ought to be affirmed.

MCBRIDE, J.

This action originated before a justice of the peace, where the plaintiff obtained judgment, from which the defendant appealed to the Circuit Court, where judgment being again rendered against him, he has appealed to this court.

The record shows that the plaintiff sold to the defendant his claim to the land upon which he resided, for which the defendant was to pay $200, a part of which was then paid and the balance to be paid at a future day. The agreement was reduced to writing, between the parties, and contained innumerable reservations of house room, pasture land, plough land, &c., in favor of the plaintiff. Indorsed on the article of agreement is a credit of $140, in two payments. Some months after the date of the foregoing transaction, the parties enter into an agreement (or bond) under seal, to submit the matters in dispute between them,...