Dickey v. Fox
Supreme Court of Missouri
«Appeal from Carroll Circuit Court. A. P. Mullins executed a note under seal to Dewey, dated October 1, 1852, for $110, payable October 1, 1854. This note contained the words “ negotiable and payable without defalcation or discount, which said amount may be discharged in good young cattle at market price.” This note was assigned by Dewey to the plaintiffs in the present suit.
Read the full summary
«Appeal from Carroll Circuit Court. A. P. Mullins executed a note under seal to Dewey, dated October 1, 1852, for $110, payable October 1, 1854. This note contained the words “ negotiable and payable without defalcation or discount, which said amount may be discharged in good young cattle at market price.” This note was assigned by Dewey to the plaintiffs in the present suit. The date of the assignment is August 18, 1853. Fox, the defendant in the present action, commenced suit September 10, 1853, against Dewey, and summoned Mullins as garnishee. Judgment was obtained in this proceeding and…
1Opinion of the CourtLeonard, Judge
The principles settled and acted upon in Gates against Kirby, (13 Mo. 158,) and in Howe against Funkhouser, decided at the St. Louis spring term, 1856, (the opinion in which was filed at the succeeding fall term,) are applicable here, and must control the decision in this case.
We are told that the bond was payable “ without discount or defalcation,” and. assigned to the plaintiff before the maker was garnished, and that therefore neither a voluntary payment nor a compulsory payment in a proceeding to which the plaintiff was a stranger could have the effect of divesting him of his debt. If…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Dobbins v. HydeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Kreher v. MasonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Green v. TimmonsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
- Holland v. SmitMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881