Clark v. Marshall

Decided March 15, 1864

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1864-03-15

Louis Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiffs, who were partners as bankers, sued defendants, who were employed in the business of investigating titles to land in St. Louis county, for giving plaintiffs a wrong statement of the number of feet remaining unsold in Kingsbury’s addition to the city of St. Louis, and then owned by the heirs of James W. Kingsbury, deceased.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1864-03-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 1914

3 state decisions

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 →

Bates, Judge,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2There was no error in the refusal of the instructions prayed by the defendants.

¶3All that was proper in the first instruction was more briefly and clearly stated in the instruction given by the court.

¶4The second, of course we do not review.

¶5No error appears in the third and fourth, because we will not weigh the testimony; and the court below may have regarded the testimony as to Chase, one of the plaintiffs, as applying to all the plaintiffs, who composed, as the record shows, a business firm, and the oral testimony was received without objection.

¶6The fifth instruction was inapplicable to the issues made in the case.

¶7The instruction given by the court very fairly stated the case, both as to the issues and the measure of damages.

¶8Judgment affirmed.

Judges Bay and Dryden concur.