Armstrong v. Winfrey
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Cass County Circuit Court. I. It is the making of “such second deed,” etc., having previously made another, which is outstanding and in force, and' omitting to recite such'former in such subsequent deed, etc., £;with intent to defraud,” that is dénounced in and prohibited by the statute.
Read the full summary
Error to Cass County Circuit Court. I. It is the making of “such second deed,” etc., having previously made another, which is outstanding and in force, and' omitting to recite such'former in such subsequent deed, etc., £;with intent to defraud,” that is dénounced in and prohibited by the statute. A party having made a deed which has been duly'recorded, and which was outstanding and in force, could hardly be held to have brought himself within the provisions of this statute by making a second deed of the same property, to a person who knew of the first, even if he failed to recite the former…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
From the record it appears that in 1858, the plaintiff was the owner of twenty acres of land adjoining the town of Pleasant Hill, in Cass county, and that in the same year he sold and conveyed the same by deed of general warranty to the Pacific Railroad Company, and that the deed was duly placed upon record. The railroad company laid out an addition to the town on the tract of land, erected their depot thereon, sold lots, and in consequence it has become valuable. At the January term, 1870, of this court, a decision was rendered in the case of the Pacific Railroad vs. Seely, et al., from…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gilmore v. CookSupreme Court of Missouri · 1862
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. ShipmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1945
- Puckett v. National Annuity Ass'nMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- State v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- Taggart v. School District No. 52Supreme Court of Missouri · 1936
- Magnuson v. Continental Casualty Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1907
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.