Eau Claire Lumber Co. v. Anderson
Missouri Court of Appeals
Error to the St. Louis Circuit Court, Gottschalk, J. The assessments, levies, and sales, being in the name of Thomas, were nullities, and the failure of Anderson to pay them constituted no breach of his covenants. — Eev.
Read the full summary
Error to the St. Louis Circuit Court, Gottschalk, J. The assessments, levies, and sales, being in the name of Thomas, were nullities, and the failure of Anderson to pay them constituted no breach of his covenants. — Eev. Stats. 1865, p. 100, sect. 13 ; Abbott v. Lindenbower, 42 Mo. 162 ; Hume v. Wainscott, 46 Mo. 145 ; Abbott v. Doling, 49 Mo. 302. Under the statutes of 1865, assessments were required to be made in the name of the owner, “ and before a levy, forfeiture, or sale he should be notified by advertisement, published for four weeks, in some newspaper, of the delinquency.”— Rev.…
1Opinion of the Court
Bakewell, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.,
This was an action for a breach of covenant of warranty implied in the words, “grant, bargain, and sell.” The petition alleges that defendant, on April 18, 1872, conveyed to one Chapman the undivided half of a tract of land in the city of St. Louis, which is described, which premises were acquired by Anderson by deeds of one Salisbury, as to a part thereof, and by deed of one Bissell, as to the residue of the tract; that on June 24, 1872, Chapman conveyed to the plaintiff all his right, title, and interest in the premises. These allegations are…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Abbott v. LindenbowerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1868
- Isaac Walker's Administrator v. DeaverMissouri Court of Appeals · 1878
- Abbott v. LindenbowerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- State ex rel. Rosenblatt v. WernerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
- Hume v. WainscottSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State ex rel. Hartley v. InnesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Cain v. FisherWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1905