Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 93

Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 93

List price: US$22.40

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1902 edition. Excerpt: ...subject to the claims of the contending parties against each other. If the lands have been sold and there are adverse claims as to some shares, the money which belongs to the owner of the share or shares so adversely claifned, is to be retained by the sheriff subject to the future orders of the court; and any party to the parti-tion proceeding claiming the moncy as owner of the premises sold, may file a petition setting forth the nature of his claim and the particulars, whereupon there shall be a summons issued to the other side, issues framed and the matter deter-mined. R. S. 1899, secs. 4389 and 4416 to 4421. It is wise to remit such disputes to a subsequent action for settlement; for we may readily perceive that if they were heard in partition cases, they would often involve a trial much more complicated and tedious than the main cause, although most of the parties to-the latte1' would have no concern whatever with the collateral inquiry. The case in hand is a good illustration. N0 contest occurred in the partition suit, but if ' the present claim had been then preferred by these respond ents against their father, the court would have had to hear a mass of testimony in order to determine whether Fannie Barkhoe-fer Was surety for her husband, or herself the principal debtor.. The effect of the statutory provisions on this subject was considered and determined in a case (Martin v. Trail, 142 Mo. 89) wherein the defense of former adjudication was so much more plausible than it is here that no doubt remains as to what our ruling should be. That was an action of ejectment brought by the plaintiff against. her father to recover a tract of land inherited from her mother. Two defenses were interposed; first that the defendant held an estate more

Product details

  • Paperback | 242 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 13mm | 440g
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236799402
  • 9781236799401