Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

119 Mo. 467

State v. Walker

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided January 31, 1894

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1894-01-31

— Hon. B. E. Turner, Judge. When there is no market price for a commodity at the place of delivery, the market price at the nearest available market, less the expense of transportation and hauling, is the measure of its value at the place of delivery. Cobb v. Whitsett, 51 Mo. App. 148; Vanstone v. Hopkins, 49 Mo. App. 386; Benjamin on Sales, 859; Sedgwick on Damages [8 Ed.], sec. 246.

Relies on State v. Patterson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded · Decided 1894-01-31

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 1953

2 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

401894190019101920193019401950decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Gantt, P. J.

¶1Defendant was indicted at the August term, 1891, of the circuit court of Scotland county, for grand larceny. He was apprehended in Iowa and returned to this state on a requisition of the *469governor. He was tried at the August term, 1893, and convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for two years.

¶2I. The record shows no arraignment, and the cause must he reversed and remanded.

¶3It would he well if prosecuting attorneys would examine the transcripts in all criminal cases and see that this error does not occur again.

¶4II. There was no error in proving the actual value of the hrood sows alleged to have been stolen, in the absence of a market price for this character of animals.

¶5III. There was no error in instructing the jury for petit larceny, as the great weight of the evidence tended to show the hogs were worth less than $30. It was entirely competent to try defendant for that offense, notwithstanding his extradition for grand larceny. State v. Patterson, 116 Mo. 505; Lascelles v. State, 16 S. E. Rep. 945; Lascelles v. State, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 687.

¶6The judgment is reversed and cause remanded solely because there is no record of arraignment, and the prisoner will be remanded from the custody of the warden of the penitentiary to that of the sheriff of Scotland county, to await further action of the circuit court of said county.

All of this division concur.
/119/mo/467 · .json · Public domain