Peter Hauptmann Tobacco Co. v. Unverferth
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from tire Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis. —Hon. Leo 8. Rassieur, Judge. (1) The justice never acquired any jurisdiction over defendant or his property because there was no valid process. No provision is made whereby one justice can issue a writ returnable before another justice, and such a writ is void.
Read the full summary
Appeal from tire Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis. —Hon. Leo 8. Rassieur, Judge. (1) The justice never acquired any jurisdiction over defendant or his property because there was no valid process. No provision is made whereby one justice can issue a writ returnable before another justice, and such a writ is void. Secs. 7420 7640, R. S. 1909. Powers of justices and the manner of exercising the same are minutely prescribed by the statutes, and if a justice of the peace exercises any power or issues any writ for which he is not specifically given authority by the statutes, and even though…
1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, P. J.
— On June 4, 1914, Peter Hauptmann Tobacco Company, respondent here, filed its statement before Robert Walker, a justice of the peace of the Fifth District of the city of St. Louis, the statement being in the form of an affidavit, to the effect •that the plaintiff had a just demand against Henry Unverferth, defendant, the amount of which, and which plaintiff ought to recover after all just credits and set-offs, being $500, and that affiant has good reason to believe, and does believe, that defendant is about to move out of the State with intent to change his domicile, and that the damages for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Thomasson v. Mercantile Town Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Boulware v. Chicago & Alton RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Lesan Advertising Co. v. CastlemanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1915
- Mangold v. DooleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- Swezea v. JenkinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.