Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Citation
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Parent Document
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1934-04-03
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3549886/wood-v-gabler/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (29)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
- Wood v. Gabler, 70 S.W.2d 110 (1934)
Full Text
716 charsPlaintiff’s action being one for rent and the items of damage set up in defendant’s counterclaim arising out of alleged acts and omissions of the landlord in failing to keep in proper repair those portions of the premises which were retained by the landlord and under his control for use in common by all the tenants in the building, we must rule that the defendant’s counterclaim is a cause of action .arising out of the contract or transaction set forth in plaintiff’s petition which, under Section 777, Revised Statutes of Missouri, 1929 (Mo. Stat. Ann., Sec. 777, p. 1022), is permissible. [See Ritchie v. Hayward, 71 Mo. 560; Barnard v. Weaver (Mo. App.), 224 S. W. 152; Kamerick v. Castleman, 23 Mo. App. 481.]