Maze v. Griffin
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Madison Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry C. Riley, Judge. (1) The proceedings in the divorce case had no' tendency to establish fraud, nor did they constitute ground for interference with the right of the appellant to dispose of his property as he saw fit, especially before the commencement of that ease.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Madison Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry C. Riley, Judge. (1) The proceedings in the divorce case had no' tendency to establish fraud, nor did they constitute ground for interference with the right of the appellant to dispose of his property as he saw fit, especially before the commencement of that ease. Accordingly the objection of the appellant to the reception of evidence of those proceedings should have been sustained, and the instructions offered by him on the subject should have been giyen. O’Day v. Conn, 32 S. W. Rep. 1109; Davis v. Davis, 5 Mo. 183; Stone v. Stone, 18 Mo.…
1Opinion of the Court
Rombatjek,, P. J.
In this interpleader proceedings •which is one arising upon garnishment, on execution, the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff in the execution and against the interpleader. The court thereupon entered judgment accordingly. From this, judgment the interpleader alone appeals, and he-assigns numerous errors which will be noticed hereafter.
At the trial the following facts appeared by the pleadings, and there was testimony tending to show them: The plaintiff was the wife of Pleasant Maze. She filed a bill for divorce, against him on February 11, 1893, and a decree was rendered…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McLaughlin v. McLaughlin's AdministratorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1852
- Weindel v. WeindelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Strauss v. AyersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Williams v. CasebeerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pickel v. PickelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1912
- Wrigley v. WrigleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1939