Farrar v. Snyder
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Hon. Daniel Dillon, Judge. The testimony of Mr. Hazzard as to his knowledge of existence of chattel mortgage should have been admitted. The testimony of Mr. Hazzard and Davis as to conversations with and declarations of vendors, while they were in possession of the property, was competent. Burgert r. Bor chert, 50 Mo. 80 ; Grreenl. on Evid. [14 Ed.] sec. 113 ; Boyd v. Jones, 60 Mo. 454; Cordes r. Strasberger, 8 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Hon. Daniel Dillon, Judge. The testimony of Mr. Hazzard as to his knowledge of existence of chattel mortgage should have been admitted. The testimony of Mr. Hazzard and Davis as to conversations with and declarations of vendors, while they were in possession of the property, was competent. Burgert r. Bor chert, 50 Mo. 80 ; Grreenl. on Evid. [14 Ed.] sec. 113 ; Boyd v. Jones, 60 Mo. 454; Cordes r. Strasberger, 8 Mo. App. 61. The testimony of Mr. Sage as to disposition of the four hundred dollars made by him should have been admitted. State to user.…
1Opinion of the CourtPeers, J.
This is an action of replevin originating in the cir.cuit conrt of the city of St. Louis.
It seems that Bailey, Sage & Company, in the year 1886, were engaged in the stationery and printing business in St. Louis, and, being unable to command sufficient capital to run their business in competition with other concerns in the city, got considerably behind in their accounts. They attempted to raise money, and in ■October, 1886, applied to Mrs. Eliza McKee, a lady of large means, for a loan of three thousand dollars, which they procured by giving their four notes, due in one, two, three, and four…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Claflin v. RosenbergSupreme Court of Missouri · 1868
- Albert v. BeselSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- Lew Weinrich & Co. v. PorterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Steward ex rel. Grantham v. ThomasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1864
- State ex rel. Little v. DonnellyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Peters-Miller Shoe Co. v. CasebeerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893