Otto F. Stifel's Union Brewing Co. v. Weber
Missouri Court of Appeals
Error to St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Rhodes E. Gave, Judge. (1) The defendant George ~W. Strodtman, being an agent of the law, was not subject to the ordinary process of garnishment prior to an order of distribution. 14 Amer. & Eng.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Rhodes E. Gave, Judge. (1) The defendant George ~W. Strodtman, being an agent of the law, was not subject to the ordinary process of garnishment prior to an order of distribution. 14 Amer. & Eng. Ency. of Law (2 Ed.), 806 and 817; Rood on Garnishment, secs. 27 and 32; 2 Shinn on Attachment and Garnishment, sec. 505; Fearing v. Shafner, 62 Miss. 791; Boylán v. Hines, 62 W. Va. 486; Curling & Robertson v. Hyde, 10 Mo. 374; Richards v. Griggs, 16 Mo. 416; State ex rel. v. Netherton, 26 Mo. App. 414; Bank of Odessa v. Barnett, 98 Mo. App. 477; In re…
1Opinion of the Court
Statement.
Plaintiff prosecutes this appeal from a judgment against it on demurrer to the bill. The bill so demurred to is as follows:
“By leave of court first had and obtained, plaintiff files this its second amended petition and for cause of action against the defendants plaintiff states that it is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Missouri and was originally incorporated under the name of Union Brewing Company and that thereafter according to law, after the twenty-seventh day of August, 1907, its name was changed to Otto F. Stifel’s Union Brewing Company; that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Goodson v. GoodsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- McGlothlin v. HemerySupreme Court of Missouri · 1869