Lewellen v. Patton

Missouri Court of Appeals

Lewellen v. Patton

73 Mo. App. 472, 1898 Mo. App. LEXIS 94

DecidedFebruary 1, 1898

StatusPublished

This text of 73 Mo. App. 472 (Lewellen v. Patton) 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

Lewellen v. Patton, 73 Mo. App. 472, 1898 Mo. App. LEXIS 94 (Mo. Ct. App. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Bond, J.

This action is upon an account against defendant as a member of the firm of Patton & Cheat-wood. It was begun before a justice and after trial and judgment appealed to the circuit court, where .the court, after hearing the evidence, gave a peremptory instruction to find for the plaintiffs. The only issue presented was as to the fact of copartnership.

Plaintiffs gave much evidence tending to prove the affirmative of this issue. Defendant, however, testifying for himself denied the fact of copartnership or that he ever held himself Out as occupying such a relation to Cheatwood. This presented a conflict in the evidence, and the burden being upon plaintiffs to prove their case the court should have submitted the issue of fact to the jury. For its refusal so to do, the judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded.

All concur.

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

Bond, J.

This action is upon an account against defendant as a member of the firm of Patton & Cheat-wood. It was begun before a justice and after trial and judgment appealed to the circuit court, where .the court, after hearing the evidence, gave a peremptory instruction to find for the plaintiffs. The only issue presented was as to the fact of copartnership.

Plaintiffs gave much evidence tending to prove the affirmative of this issue. Defendant, however, testifying for himself denied the fact of copartnership or that he ever held himself Out as occupying such a relation to Cheatwood. This presented a conflict in the evidence, and the burden being upon plaintiffs to prove their case the court should have submitted the issue of fact to the jury. For its refusal so to do, the judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 Mo. App. 472, 1898 Mo. App. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewellen-v-patton-moctapp-1898.