Clifton v. Anderson
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. James E. Withrow, Judge. Mrs. Clifton did not have a separate estate in the property described. Turner v. Shaw, 96 Mo. 22 ; Kid-well v. Kirkpatrick, 70 Mo. 214; Schafroth v. Arribs, 46 Mo. 518; Paul v. Leavitt, 53 Mo. 595; Nicholson v. Flynn, 24 Mo. App. 574; Edwards v. Burns, 26 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. James E. Withrow, Judge. Mrs. Clifton did not have a separate estate in the property described. Turner v. Shaw, 96 Mo. 22 ; Kid-well v. Kirkpatrick, 70 Mo. 214; Schafroth v. Arribs, 46 Mo. 518; Paul v. Leavitt, 53 Mo. 595; Nicholson v. Flynn, 24 Mo. App. 574; Edwards v. Burns, 26 Mo. App. 44; Bank v. Collins, 75 Mo. 280. The property not being the separate estate of Mrs. Clifton, she did not charge it by borrowing the money from defendant, if she did borrow it. Bank v. Collins, 75 Mo. 280; Clafiin v. Wagoner, 32 Mo. 252; Arnold v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.
The plaintiff Daniel W. Clifton was the husband, and his co-plaintiffs are the children and only heirs-at-law, of Sarah Clifton, deceased, and as such they instituted this action in equity to cancel and annul the following judgment or decree of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, rendered on the twenty-first day of December, 1886, to-wit:
“ John Anderson v. “Daniel W. Clifton, Administrator of Sarah Clifton, deceased.
Number 72377.
“Come now at this day the said parties by their respective attorneys and submit this cause to the court upon the petition and agreed statement of facts…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Vogler v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Harrington v. UtterbackSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Davis v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- Gardner v. TerrySupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
- McPike v. PenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gazollo v. McCannMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
- Clifton v. AndersonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891