Goodloe v. Empson Packing Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Goodloe v. Empson Packing Co.

122 S.W. 771, 145 Mo. App. 574, 1909 Mo. App. LEXIS 326

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 16, 1909

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 122 S.W. 771 (Goodloe v. Empson Packing Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Goodloe v. Empson Packing Co., 122 S.W. 771, 145 Mo. App. 574, 1909 Mo. App. LEXIS 326 (Mo. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

EEYNOLDS, P. J.

(after stating the facts).

The court committed no error in refusing to hold the statement filed insufficient. . Neither by any rulings at the trial nor by declarations of law are we informed on what theory the trial judge acted in holding that there had not been accord and satisfaction between the parties. The voucher and letter accompanying the check sent, shows that the check was sent in full payment of the account, which account covered the transactions here in suit. The retention of the check, unaccompanied by any explanation, in the face of the offer that it was in full payment, is conclusive on plaintiff. We have recently held in the case of Pub. Geo. Knapp & Co. v. [578]*578Pepsin Syrup Co., 137 Mo. App. 472, 119 S. W. 38, that such, was the law. See also Lightfoot v. Hurd, 113 Mo. App. 612. See further Barrett v. Kern, 141 Mo. App. 5, 121 S. W. 774, where the Iuav of accord and satisfaction is discussed. There were no conflicting facts in evidence on this matter of accord and satisfaction. All there is about it is in the letter, receipt and check. Respondent claims that no such defense was pleaded. This was a case coming to the circuit court from that of the justice and required no pleadings upon the part of the defendant. While it is true that alj presumptions are to be indulged in in favor of the action of the trial court, we cannot indulge in presumptions in the face of the record.

The judgment of the circuit court must be and is reversed.

All concur.

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

EEYNOLDS, P. J.

(after stating the facts).

The court committed no error in refusing to hold the statement filed insufficient. . Neither by any rulings at the trial nor by declarations of law are we informed on what theory the trial judge acted in holding that there had not been accord and satisfaction between the parties. The voucher and letter accompanying the check sent, shows that the check was sent in full payment of the account, which account covered the transactions here in suit. The retention of the check, unaccompanied by any explanation, in the face of the offer that it was in full payment, is conclusive on plaintiff. We have recently held in the case of Pub. Geo. Knapp & Co. v. [578]*578Pepsin Syrup Co., 137 Mo. App. 472, 119 S. W. 38, that such, was the law. See also Lightfoot v. Hurd, 113 Mo. App. 612. See further Barrett v. Kern, 141 Mo. App. 5, 121 S. W. 774, where the Iuav of accord and satisfaction is discussed. There were no conflicting facts in evidence on this matter of accord and satisfaction. All there is about it is in the letter, receipt and check. Respondent claims that no such defense was pleaded. This was a case coming to the circuit court from that of the justice and required no pleadings upon the part of the defendant. While it is true that alj presumptions are to be indulged in in favor of the action of the trial court, we cannot indulge in presumptions in the face of the record.

The judgment of the circuit court must be and is reversed.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 S.W. 771, 145 Mo. App. 574, 1909 Mo. App. LEXIS 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodloe-v-empson-packing-co-moctapp-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack