Rennick v. Walton
| Decision Date | 30 April 1842 |
| Parties | RENNICK v. WALTON. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAFAYETTE COUNTY.
BURDEN, for Appellant.
FRENCH & SAWYER, for Appellee.
This was an action by petition in debt by William P. Walton against Andrew E. Rennick. Plaintiff obtained a verdict and judgment for nine hundred and sixty-eight dollars and eighty-six cents. Plaintiff remitted sixty-five dollars. After verdict the defendant moved for a new trial, because the court had admitted improper and illegal testimony, and because the verdict was against the weight of testimony. It does not appear from the bill of exceptions that the defendant objected to the testimony when it was offered, and a verdict found upon conflicting testimony will not be disturbed by this court. (a) Judgment affirmed.
(a). Oldham v. Henderson, 4 Mo. R. 300, and note.
To continue reading
Request your trial
8 cases
-
In re Lankford's Estate
...that unless the judgment of the court nisi were sustained by substantial evidence, we had power to reverse for this reason alone. Rennick v. Walton, 7 Mo. 292; Wilson v. Burks, 8 Mo. 446; Hartt v. Leavenworth, 11 Mo. 629; Swan v. Hyde, 9 Mo. 849; Howard v. Coshow, 33 Mo. 118; Heyneman v. Ga......
-
In re Assessment of Collateral Inheritance Tax In Estate of Lankford
...that unless the judgment of the court nisi were sustained by substantial evidence, we had power to reverse for this reason alone. [Rennick v. Walton, 7 Mo. 292; Wilson Burks, 8 Mo. 446; Hartt v. Leavenworth, 11 Mo. 629; Swan v. Hyde, 9 Mo. 849; Howard v. Coshow, 33 Mo. 118; Heyneman v. Garn......
-
State ex rel. Laclede Bank v. Lewis
...of the circuit court in the case of Albers v. The Laclede Bank, will not be an adequate remedy. Lockwood v. Ins. Co., 47 Mo. 50; Rennick v. Walton, 7 Mo. 292; Glasgow v. Moore, 9 Mo. 834. Marshall & Barclay for respondents. 1. The act sought to be prohibited, viz: the issue of process to en......
-
Culbertson v. Hill
...verdict is so against the evidence as to raise the presumption that the jury acted from prejudice, corruption or gross ignorance. Renick v. Walton, 7 Mo. 292; Watts v. Douglas, 10 Mo. 676; Reid v. Ins. Co., 58 Mo. 421; Hodges v. Black, 76 527. (4) Plaintiffs' instructions properly declared ......
Request a trial to view additional results