¶1The defendant has no ground of complaint because the jury found a verdict for plaintiff for “ just one-half of the amount” the latter claimed was due him, notwithstanding the evidence as to the amount due him was uncontradicted. The defendant cannot be said to have been injured because compelled by the verdict to pay a less sum than he contracted to pay. Were the plaintiff complaining, a different question would be presented, one not necessary to be now considered. The result is, we affirm the judgment.
74 Mo. 78
Alderman v. Cox
Decided October 15, 1881
Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1881-10-15
— Hon. H. S. Kelley, • Judge. The petition alleged the sale of a threshing machine to two persons, jointly, and their joint undertaking to pay for the same, and asked judgment against one of them personally, and also against him as the administrator of the other party. His answer was a general denial. There was evidence that the machine was to be paid for in notes.
Key passage — most relied on by later courts
“The defendant cannot be said to have been injured because compelled by the verdict to pay a less sum than he contracted to pay.”
quoted by 1 later decision, including Ansonia Foundry Co. v. Bethlehem Steel Co.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1881-10-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 1923
10 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 →