Walker v. Keile
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to Benton Circuit Court. The plaintiff in error insists that the deed is insufficient, and ought to have been excluded by the court below. The bill of exceptions shows the defendant below objected to the reading of the said deed, and that his objection was overruled. As to whether the instrument above referred to is a sealed instrument or not, see Rev. Code, Mo. Laws, p. 118, sec. 3; 3 Mo. Rep., p. 80, and 5 Mo.
Read the full summary
ERROR to Benton Circuit Court. The plaintiff in error insists that the deed is insufficient, and ought to have been excluded by the court below. The bill of exceptions shows the defendant below objected to the reading of the said deed, and that his objection was overruled. As to whether the instrument above referred to is a sealed instrument or not, see Rev. Code, Mo. Laws, p. 118, sec. 3; 3 Mo. Rep., p. 80, and 5 Mo. Rep., p. 281. The evidence offered by the defendant below, of a parole agreement, ought to have been given, if for no other purpose, to mitigate damages. The plaintiff in erro:…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.
This was an action of ejectment brought by Keile against Walker, to recover possession' of a tract of land. On the trial Keile had a verdict and judgment, to reverse which Walker has sued out this writ of error.
The land in controversy, it seems, was sold under several executions issued against Walker, and Keile becoming the purchaser, he received an instrument from the sheriff, purporting to be a conveyance of the land. This instrument, in the body of it, was termed an indenture, and had a scroll annexed to the signature of the sheriff, but there was nothing in the body of it by which the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Frohman v. BonelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Dickens v. MillerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1882
- Brown v. CohnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
- Moreau v. DetchemendySupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Alt v. StokerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895