Reilly v. Powell

Decided March 4, 1889

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1889-03-04

— Hon. Turner A. Gill, Judge. Affidavit is insufficient by stating “ affiant says complaint is true in substance.” We are not informed what affiant regarded as “substance,” hence, cannot know what he intends to verify and what not. Remington Co. v. Cushen, 8 Mo. App. 528 ; Crawshaw v. Wright, 5 Mo. App. 577; Cunningham v. Goelet, 4 Denio, 71 ; Fxparte Bank, 7 Hill, 177. Affidavit is jurisdictional in this kind of action. Fletcher v. Keyte, 66 Mo. 285.

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently April 1904

4 state decisions

Relies on Fletcher v. Keyte

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and dismissed · Decided 1889-03-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Ellison, J.

¶1This action is unlawful detainer. The-affidavit to the complaint is made by plaintiffs agent, who “ on his oath says that the foregoing complaint is true in substance”’ Objection is made that the affidavit-is insufficient by reason of being qualified by the words- “ in substance.” We think the objection is well taken. There is no necessity for experiments in matters of this *433nature, especially when they are jurisdictional. The affiant swears that the matters, which he conceives to be of substance in the complaint, are true.

¶2Those matters which he may think are not of substance are not sworn to. This would leave the matter a question of opinion.

¶3As the affidavit is jurisdictional, we will reverse the judgment and dismiss the case. Fletcher v. Keyte, 66 Mo. 285.

Smith, P. J., concurs; Gill, J., not sitting.