Barton Bros. v. Martin
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Bates Circuit Court — Hon. James H. Lay, Judge. (1) The petition of plaintiff, held to be insufficient upon the demurrer of defendant Grlazebrook, was not the third petition adjudged insufficient by the court. • Revised Statutes, secs. 2066, 2067, 2068; Spurlock v. Bailroad, 93 Mo. 13, 530; Corrigan v. Brady, 38 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Bates Circuit Court — Hon. James H. Lay, Judge. (1) The petition of plaintiff, held to be insufficient upon the demurrer of defendant Grlazebrook, was not the third petition adjudged insufficient by the court. • Revised Statutes, secs. 2066, 2067, 2068; Spurlock v. Bailroad, 93 Mo. 13, 530; Corrigan v. Brady, 38 Mo. App. 659. (2) Sheriff Grlazebrook was a necessary and proper party at the beginning of the suit, and the cause was properly revived against his administratrix, who held the trust fund in question after his death. Revised Statutes, sec. 1993; Smith v. Sims, 77 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
— This action is based on a petition to recover the proceeds arising from a sale of certain merchandise. The sale was made by the sheriff under an attachment in favor of the Gregory Grocery Company, the said sheriff and grocery company being made defendants. Each of them filed an answer to the petition. On June 27, 1890, plaintiff, under leave asked and obtained, filed an amended petition. After-wards on February 18,1891, defendants withdrew their answers and filed a demurrer to this petition. After-wards, .on June 8, 1891, this demurrer was sustained and leave given plaintiffs to file an…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Spears v. BondSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- State ex rel. Knapp, Stout & Co. v. FinnMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Spurlock v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- State ex rel. Moore v. WhiteSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
3Cited by3 opinions
- Antonelli v. BasileMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- State v. EarllSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- Bank of Tupelo v. StonumMissouri Court of Appeals · 1926