Hatry v. Shuman
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL EBOM ST. LOUIS COUBT OP COMMON PLEAS. Edward Shuman brought suit by petition in debt, in the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, against Joseph Hatry, and sued out an attachment thereon. At the return term, and within the first three days of the term, the defendant filed a plea in abatement, and also, but afterwards, and on the same day, filed a plea to the merits.
Read the full summary
APPEAL EBOM ST. LOUIS COUBT OP COMMON PLEAS. Edward Shuman brought suit by petition in debt, in the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, against Joseph Hatry, and sued out an attachment thereon. At the return term, and within the first three days of the term, the defendant filed a plea in abatement, and also, but afterwards, and on the same day, filed a plea to the merits. The plaintiff moved to strike out the plea in abatement, for the reason that the defendant had pleaded to the merits of the action. While said motion was pending, the defendant asked leave to withdraw from the files his plea to…
1Opinion of the Court
RYLAND, J.'
Prom the above statement, the only point for the consideration of this court arises from the action of tlie court below in striking out the defendant’s plea, putting in issue the truth of the affidavit on which the attach'ment issued in this case. This plea is said, by the statute permitting the defendant in attachment to file it, to be a plea in the nature of a plea in abatement. Such a plea has been heretofore considered by this court to be “ a plea in abatement.” See Livengood v. Shaw, 10 Mo. R. 276. I am of the opinion that this is the correct and proper construction, and that…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Coombs Commission Co. v. BlockSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Sharkey v. WilliamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Audenreid v. HullMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
- Bourgoin v. WheatonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- Houghland v. DentMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893