Boon v. Miller's Executors

16 Mo. 457
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided July 15, 1852·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

RylaNd, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a bill in chancery, filed by the complainants against John Miller and the executrix of Thomas A. Smith, deceased, in the Howard Circuit Court, and afterwards removed to Cooper Circuit Court, on account of the judge of the Howard'Circuit Court having been of counsel for one of the parties. The following are the material facts, as appears from the bill, answer and exhibits :

The bill was filed in the Howard Circuit Court, in June, 1845, by Hampton L. and William C. Boon, against John Miller and the executors of T. A. Smith, and stated the following case:

In March, 1834, Miller, Smith and H. L. Boon entered. into a mercantile partnership, at Fayette, until 1840, with .a capital of si? thousand dollars, which was to be advanced; [459] equally by Miller and Smith. Boon was to conduct the business, and the profits were to be equally divided among the partners. The firm commenced business, and carried it on until January 1, 1837, when the partnership was dissolved by mutual consent. The stock on hand was sold on credit, to a new firm, consisting of James Miller and James Smith, for ten thousand dollars, six thousand of which was turned over to the original partners, Smith and Miller, on account of capital stock advanced, and the remaining four thousand dollars left in the hands of the partner, Boon, to close up the affairs of the concern with.

On the 27th of June, 1889, a_written agreement was entered into between Miller and Smith, of the one part, and H. L. Boon and W. G. Boon and others, his sureties, of the other part, which, after reciting that the partnership had been dissolved upon the following terms : Smith and Miller to relinquish to Boon all their partnership effects, and Boon, on his part, to refund to Miller and Smith the capital by them respectively advanced, with ten por cent, per annum interest thereon from the time of the respective advancements, and to pay all the demands against the firm, including a note for a thousand dollars and interest, made by Miller to Stanly, for money borrowed to go into the firm, and to guaranty the payment of these demands, provided that H. L. Boon would pay the said demands, and the capital respectively advanced by the partners, Miller and Smith, with interest thereon at ten per cent, from the time the same was advanced, and that Miller and Smith would relinquish to ' Boon the partnership effects. Miller advanced his three thousand dollars, for capital, about the twelfth March, 1834, and received from H. L. Boon the following sums : 1st January, 1837, three thousand dollars on the indebtedness of James Smith and James Miller. 29th June, 1839, one thousand six hundred and fifty-five dollars, and in 1840, thirty-six dollars. Subsequent to these payments, H. L. Boon discovered that, in settling the amount due Miller for capital and interest, he had made a mistake, which [460] consisted in calculating the interest down to the time of the* agreement of June, 1889, instead of stopping at the 1st January, 1837, when the three thousand dollars was paid, so that at the time of the payment of the sixteen hundred and fifty-five dollars, thsit payment exceeded the amount then due four hundred and seventy-seven dollars, allowing Miller ten per cent, interest on his capital down to first January, 1837. Miller, having himself paid off the principal and interest due Stanly on his note, sued Hampton L. and William C. Boon, on the agreement of June, 1837, in the Howard Circuit Court, and recovered the balance due on that account in December, 1844, amounting then to one thousand four hundred and twenty-five dollars, and fourteen cents. Upon this judgment, W. C. Boon paid Miller one thousand and fifty dollars, leaving a balance due on the judgment of four hundred and nineteen dollars, seventy-two cents, for which an execution was in the hands of the sheriff of Howard county.

The prayer of the bill was for an injunction against the judgment till the final hearing, and on the final hearing, that the sum due from Miller, on account on the overpayment, be applied to the payment of the balance due on the judgment, and that Miller be decreed to pay to W. C. Boon the excess, over what was necessary to extinguish the balance due on the judgment.

Smith’s executors answered, denying all knowledge of the transaction, and John Miller having died, the suit was revived against his executors, who put in their answer, in which they deny that there was any mistake, and allege that the true construction of the agreement of June, 1839, was, that Boon should pay ten per cent, per annum on the capital,' down to that time; that both parties so understood the contract, and that, immediately after the contract, a settlement was made in writing by H. L. Boon of the amount due from him to Miller, under the agreement, in which he charged himself with three thousand dollars, and the interest calculated down to that time, and credited himself with the three thousand dollars re[461] turned in 1837, and Smith and Miller’s note for sixteen hundred and thirty dollars, leaving a balance due of three hundred and sixty-two dollars, fifty cents, for which he gave his note to Miller, and thereby settled the account. The defendants exhibited the written settlement in H. L. Boon’s handwriting, and the $362 note, upon which there was a credit for thirty-six dollars paid in 1840.

The cause having been removed to Cooper county, was heard there in September, 1850, and, upon the hearing, the plaintiff read in evidence the exhibits to the bill and answer, and receipts for the money charged in the bill to have been paid by W. C. Boon to Miller on account of the Stanly debt. These exhibits and receipts are as follows :

Exhibit A.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Boon v. Miller's Executors, 16 Mo. 457 (Mo. 1852).

16 Mo. 457 (Boon v. Miller's Executors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Michie v. Grainger
129 S.W. 983 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
Williams v. Carroll County
66 S.W. 955 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
Commissioners of Montgomery Co. v. Fry
37 S.E. 259 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1900)
Long v. Eisenbeis
51 P. 1061 (Washington Supreme Court, 1898)
Gill v. Pelkey
54 Ohio St. (N.S.) 348 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1896)
Wilson v. Boughton
50 Mo. 17 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1872)