Watson v. Crandall

78 Mo. 583
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided October 15, 1883·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Ray, J.

This cause was commenced in the St. Louis circuit court, where there was a dismissal as to defendant Minshall, and a judgment for the plaintiff against the other defendants, from which Conlogue and. McKeen appealed to the St. Louis court of appeals, where the judgment of the circuit court was affirmed, from which the said Conlogue and McKeen have appealed to this court. The case is reported in 7 Mo. App. 233, where the opinion of that court is set out in full, and to which reference is here had. TTpon a careful consideration and review of that opinion we are satisfied with the result reached by that, court, and for the reasons assigned. After a careful examination,-also, of the elaborate briefs of counsel, in this court, we find no cause to change our views. We think the case well considered and properly decided.

For these reasons the judgment of the St. Louis court of appeals is affirmed.

All concur.

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

Watson v. Crandall, 78 Mo. 583 (Mo. 1883).

78 Mo. 583 (Watson v. Crandall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilson v. Murch
354 S.W.2d 332 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1962)
Harrison v. Harker
142 P. 716 (Utah Supreme Court, 1914)
James v. Crosthwait
36 L.R.A. 631 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1896)