Browning v. Chrisman
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Howard Circuit Court. This cause grows out of an action of ejectment brought in the Moniteau circuit court in February, 1856, by T. E. Dickerson against David Chrisman, to recover possession of certain real estate in the town of California. In this suit the plaintiff claimed title by virtue of a deed from one Browning.
Read the full summary
Error to Howard Circuit Court. This cause grows out of an action of ejectment brought in the Moniteau circuit court in February, 1856, by T. E. Dickerson against David Chrisman, to recover possession of certain real estate in the town of California. In this suit the plaintiff claimed title by virtue of a deed from one Browning. The defendant Chrisman set up an equitable defence, alleging a prior purchase by himself from Browning; that he took possession under said purchase and paid a portion of the purchase money; that Browning executed a deed to him but fraudulently refused to deliver it;…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, Judge
We can not see any ground on which the action of the court below can be sustained. It is a great mistake to suppose that a plaintiff can bring in and dismiss parties at his discretion. This power,is very much abused under the present practice act. A defendant is brought in by the plaintiff, who, he finds, is a little too hard for him, and who, he sees, may defeat his action, and he will rid himself of the difficulty by dismissing his suit as to such defendant. We had occasion, in the case of May v. Keithley, 29 Mo. 220, to remark upon this practice, and point out the evils which may flow from…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Keithley v. MaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1859
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dorriss v. CarterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878