Price v. Evans

49 Mo. 396
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedFebruary 15, 1872
StatusPublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 49 Mo. 396 (Price v. Evans) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Price v. Evans, 49 Mo. 396 (Mo. 1872).

Opinion

Bliss, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The petition contained two counts, one for $700 paid by plaintiffs as sureties for defendants, and one for a balance of account at their bank of $346. The answer averred payment of the note and a deposit to the plaintiffs’ credit of $1,200, for which defendants, after deducting the $346, asked judgment. The jury found for defendants on ' the first count, and gave the plaintiffs a verdict of $380 upon the second. The instructions were, correct, and we are asked to grant a new trial because there [397]*397was no evidence to sustain the verdict upon the first count. There is reason to believe that the verdict was wrong, and I think the trial court would have been justified in giving a new trial. Notwithstanding trial courts may thus act when they see the jury has been misled, yet if they refuse to do so, it is not error unless the preponderance of evidence against the verdict is so strong as to raise a presumption of prejudice, corruption, or gross ignorance on the part of the jury. Such has been our uniform holding, and any other would be impossible.

One of the grounds for the motion was newly-discovered evidence, but the affidavit shows that it was known before the trial but not deemed necessary. Defendants failed in saddling upon the plaintiffs the $1,200 deposit which had once been accounted for, but succeeded, and perhaps unjustly, with the $700. But owing to our well-settled and absolutely necessary rule of not reviewing facts when there is conflicting evidence, we cannot relieve them.

Judgment affirmed.

Judge Wagner .concurs. Judge Adams absent.

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

Related

Burston v. Fennewald
2 S.W.2d 824 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1928)
Jones v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co.
228 S.W. 780 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1921)
Harper v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad
172 S.W. 55 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
Van Loon v. St. Joseph Railway, Light, Heat & Power Co.
160 S.W. 63 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1913)
Kiel v. Ott
151 S.W. 182 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1912)
Lehnick v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
94 S.W. 996 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1906)
Woodard v. Cooney
85 S.W. 598 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1905)
Farrell v. St. Louis Transit Co.
78 S.W. 312 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1903)
Friedman v. Pulitzer Publishing Co.
77 S.W. 340 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1903)
Cook v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
68 S.W. 230 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1902)
Snyder v. Wabash Railroad Co.
85 Mo. App. 495 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1900)
Chouquette v. Southern Electric Railroad
53 S.W. 897 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1899)
Chitty v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.
49 S.W. 868 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1899)
McLean v. Pastime Gymnasium Ass'n
64 Mo. App. 55 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1895)
Walton v. Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railroad
49 Mo. App. 620 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1892)
Duggan v. Wabash Western Railway Co.
46 Mo. App. 266 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1891)
State v. McNamara
100 Mo. 100 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1889)
Henderson v. St. Louis & Hannibal Railway Co.
36 Mo. App. 109 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1889)
State v. Primm
98 Mo. 368 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1889)
St. Louis Gas Light Co. v. American Fire Insurance
33 Mo. App. 348 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 Mo. 396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/price-v-evans-mo-1872.