Pitts v. Fugate
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
| Writing for the Court | HOLMES |
| Citation | 41 Mo. 405 |
| Parties | WILLIAM G. PITTS, Respondent, v. NANCY FUGATE, Adm'x of JOHN FUGATE, dec'd, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 31 October 1867 |
41 Mo. 405
WILLIAM G. PITTS, Respondent,
v.
NANCY FUGATE, Adm'x of JOHN FUGATE, dec'd, Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri.
October Term, 1867.
Appeal from the Sixth District Court.
James Carr, for appellant.
W. J. Howell, for respondent.
HOLMES, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.
In this case there were two counts for separate causes of action joined in the petition, one upon a promissory note, the other for money paid to the use of the defendant. There was no separate assessment of damages or verdict on each cause of action, but one verdict and assessment of damages in one gross sum on the whole petition. A motion in arrest of
[41 Mo. 406]
judgment for this reason was made and overruled. It has been decided that a judgment rendered upon such a verdict is erroneous--Clark v. Han. & St. Jo. R. R. Co., 36 Mo. 215; Mooney v. Kennett, 19 Mo. 554. The provisions of the present Practice Act on this subject are similar to those of the act of 1849--Acts of 1849, p. 89, § 2; G. S. 1866, ch. 169, §§ 20, 26. The difference between a general and a special verdict is there distinctly defined. A general finding for the defendant on all the issues where there are several causes of action joined in the same petition, may be sustained; but where the finding is for the plaintiff, there must be a separate verdict and a distinct assessment of the damages on each count; otherwise it is impossible for the court to know how the issues were found, or upon which count the damages are assessed. For this reason the judgment must be reversed.
One count alleged the payment of money for the use of the defendant on a judgment rendered against the plaintiff, and the defendant's intestate on a demand in which he was security only for the other. The record of the judgment was not produced in evidence, but the testimony of a witness was admitted without objection to prove the fact of payment, the judgment, and the nature of the transaction. The defendant offered evidence tending to show that the judgment was founded upon a money bond which was void on account of illegality in the consideration. This might have been a good defence to that action, but the judgment was conclusive of that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morris v. Jones, No. 62
...the States. Under Missouri law petitioner's judgment was a final determination of the nature and amount of his claim. See Pitts v. Fugate, 41 Mo. 405; Central Trust Co. of Mobile v. D'Arcy, 238 Mo. 676, 142 S.W. 294; State ex rel. Robb v. Shain, 347 Mo. 928, 149 S.W.2d 812. That determinati......
-
Phelps v. Scott, No. 28578.
...a party seeks subrogation for a judgment paid by him, such judgment seems to be conclusive in the latter proceedings. Pitts v. Fugate, 41 Mo. 405; State ex rel. v. Rainey, 74 Mo. 234; Harper v. Kemble, 65 Mo. App. 519. (2) When a court of equity acquires jurisdiction of a cause it will not ......
-
Consolidated School District v. Day, No. 30461.
...judicata of every defense, inclusive of constitutional requirements, which might have been interposed. [Pitts v. Fugate's Administratrix, 41 Mo. 405, 406; State ex rel. Wilson v. Rainey, 74 Mo. 229, 234; Nelson v. Nelson, 282 Mo. 412, 423, 221 S.W. 1066; City Water Co. v. Sedalia, 288 Mo. 4......
-
City of St. Charles v. Stookey, 2,508.
...and the verdict fails to show upon which cause of action it rests (Mooney v. Kennett, 19 Mo. 551, 61 Am.Dec. 576; Pitts v. Fugate, 41 Mo. 405; State v. Dulle, 45 Mo. 269; Bigelow v. Railway Co., 48 Mo. 510; Cole v. Armour, 154 Mo. 333, 55 S.W. 476); but the causes of action pleaded were not......
-
Morris v. Jones, No. 62
...the States. Under Missouri law petitioner's judgment was a final determination of the nature and amount of his claim. See Pitts v. Fugate, 41 Mo. 405; Central Trust Co. of Mobile v. D'Arcy, 238 Mo. 676, 142 S.W. 294; State ex rel. Robb v. Shain, 347 Mo. 928, 149 S.W.2d 812. That determinati......
-
Phelps v. Scott, No. 28578.
...a party seeks subrogation for a judgment paid by him, such judgment seems to be conclusive in the latter proceedings. Pitts v. Fugate, 41 Mo. 405; State ex rel. v. Rainey, 74 Mo. 234; Harper v. Kemble, 65 Mo. App. 519. (2) When a court of equity acquires jurisdiction of a cause it will not ......
-
Consolidated School District v. Day, No. 30461.
...judicata of every defense, inclusive of constitutional requirements, which might have been interposed. [Pitts v. Fugate's Administratrix, 41 Mo. 405, 406; State ex rel. Wilson v. Rainey, 74 Mo. 229, 234; Nelson v. Nelson, 282 Mo. 412, 423, 221 S.W. 1066; City Water Co. v. Sedalia, 288 Mo. 4......
-
City of St. Charles v. Stookey, 2,508.
...and the verdict fails to show upon which cause of action it rests (Mooney v. Kennett, 19 Mo. 551, 61 Am.Dec. 576; Pitts v. Fugate, 41 Mo. 405; State v. Dulle, 45 Mo. 269; Bigelow v. Railway Co., 48 Mo. 510; Cole v. Armour, 154 Mo. 333, 55 S.W. 476); but the causes of action pleaded were not......