City of St. Louis v. Brooks
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Valliant, Judge. ■ (1) The sheriff’s advertisement was sufficient. R. S. 1879, sec. 2380. (2) Where the execution is regular on its face, the sheriff is not bound to go behind the writ to see whether the judgment is regular. Higdon v. Conway, 12 Mo. 295. (3) The form of notice given in this case is the one in common use, and this court will take cognizance of the forms commonly used to enforce the process of the courts.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Valliant, Judge. ■ (1) The sheriff’s advertisement was sufficient. R. S. 1879, sec. 2380. (2) Where the execution is regular on its face, the sheriff is not bound to go behind the writ to see whether the judgment is regular. Higdon v. Conway, 12 Mo. 295. (3) The form of notice given in this case is the one in common use, and this court will take cognizance of the forms commonly used to enforce the process of the courts. But if not there was no evidence offered tending to show that the •sheriff proceeded in this, case in any manner other…
1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.
This case is now before ns on the-appeal of Lydia C. Brown and her husband to review the action of the circuit court in setting aside an execution sale.
The suit was instituted by the city of St. Louis-against John T. Brooks to enforce a special tax bill for $37.20, against a lot having a frontal of thirty-one feet, owned by Brooks. There was no personal service of process upon him, he being a non-resident, but he was duly notified by newspaper publication. Final judgment by default was entered in April, 1888, on which a special execution was issued, dated the fourteenth of June of that year,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gale v. MichieSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Slagel v. MurdockSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- State v. NewkirkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
- American Wine Co. v. ScholerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- McKee v. LoganSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Walter v. ScofieldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Howard v. StrodeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
- Shohoney v. Quincy, Omaha & Kansas City RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Arndt v. ArndtMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Carter v. Louisiana Purchase Exposition Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1907
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.