Webster Coll. v. Tyler
| Decision Date | 31 October 1864 |
| Citation | 35 Mo. 268 |
| Parties | WEBSTER COLLEGE, Appellant, v. J. D. TYLER, Respondent. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioner's Court.
E. Casselberry, for appellant.
J. R. Lackland, for respondent.
This was a suit begun before a justice of the peace upon a note made by the defendant to A. Bullard, president of the board of trustees of Webster College, for one hundred doliars, dated December 1, 1854, and payable five years after date. The defendant gave in evidence a certificate with the same date, signed by A. Bullard, president of the board of trustees of Webster College; that the defendant having subscribed $500 for the purpose of obtaining a scholarship in Webster College, and having executed his note for the same, he in payment in full of the aforesaid sum should be entitled to a perpetual scholarship, &c. and also gave in evidence a resolution of the board of trustees of the college, as follows: “Resolved, that for the next five years any one who has paid one hundred dollars to Webster College and given his or her note or notes for $400 more, bearing six per cent. interest per annum for not a longer period than one, two, three and four years, in equal instalments, shall at once on the opening of the institution be entitled to all the advantages of a scholarship, unless he or she shall fail to pay said notes, or either of them, with interest on maturity.”
The defendant also gave in evidence that many notes were given to the college in order to get it established and for scholarships, and that many of them had not been paid; that professors and teachers were employed for a time, but that now none were employed and no school kept up there.
For the defendant the court instructed the jury as follows: “If the jury find that the consideration for which the note sued on was given has wholly failed, they will find for the defendant.” There was verdict and judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff has brought the case to this court by appeal. The instruction given was manifestly wrong. There was absolutely no evidence of what was the consider ation of the note.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Collins v. Wilhoit
...There was no evidence offered at the trial upon which said instructions could be based. Harrison v. Cachelin, 27 Mo. 26; Webster College v. Tyler, 35 Mo. 268. The clearly shows that Collins had no knowledge of the mortgage given by McComas to Waller until after the levy, and there is no evi......
-
State ex rel. Stevens v. Arnold
...v. McLoon, 304 Mo. 238, 263 S.W. 174; Champion Coated Paper Co. v. Shilkee, 237 S.W. 109; Milan Bank v. Richmond, 235 Mo. 532; Webster College v. Tyler, 35 Mo. 268. (4) The submission of an issue not raised by the pleadings error. Champion Coated Paper Co. v. Shilkee, 237 S.W. 109; McKenzie......
-
Elizabeth Garvin's Adm'r v. Williams
...Nelson v. Boland, 37 Mo. 432; Heyneman v. Garneau, 33 Mo. 565; Morris v. Barnes, 35 Mo. 412; Atkyns v. Nicholson, 31 Mo. 488; Webster College v. Tyler, 35 Mo. 268; Hart v. Leavenworth, 11 Mo. 629; Williams v. Brassfield, 9 Yerg. 270; Linton v. Schwab, 32 Verm. 612; 3 Gra. & Waterm. New Tria......
-
State ex rel. Stevens v. Arnold
...v. McLoon, 304 Mo. 238, 263 S.W. 174; Champion Coated Paper Co. v. Shilkee, 237 S.W. 109; Milan Bank v. Richmond, 235 Mo. 532; Webster College v. Tyler, 35 Mo. 268. (4) The submission of an issue not raised by the pleadings is error. Champion Coated Paper Co. v. Shilkee, 237 S.W. 109; McKen......