Hicks v. Martin
Missouri Court of Appeals
Statement of case by the court. This action originated in a justice’s court. It was a proceeding by attachment under the landlord and tenant’s act.
Read the full summary
Statement of case by the court. This action originated in a justice’s court. It was a proceeding by attachment under the landlord and tenant’s act. The affidavit, among other things, alleged, as the grounds of the attachment, that there was due and owing the plaintiff, the sum of $87.50 as rent money on certain premises let by him to the defendant, Martin; and it was sought to bind the other defendants, Tanner and Adams, for this rent, on the ground that they had taken a part of the same premises under Martin as tenants. On the trial before the justice, as on appeal in the circuit court,. the…
1Opinion of the CourtPhilips, P. J.
Two questions arise on this record: first, as to the action of the circuit court in holding that the issue on the plea in abatement was properly retriable on the appeal taken by plaintiff from the justice’s, court; and, second, in holding that the defendants were not liable on the merits.
I. Section 3092, Revised Statutes, provides, that: “ The proceedings on all attachments issued under this chapter (concerning landlords and tenants) shall be the same as provided by law in cases of suits by attachment.”
Section 481, concerning attachments in justices’courts, declares, that: “The provisions of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Willis v. StevensMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Chamberlain v. HeardMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
3Cited by15 opinions
- St. Joseph & St. Louis Railroad v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- Brummitt Tire Co. v. Sinclair Refining Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1934
- Sandige v. HillMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
- Hubbard v. QuisenberryMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Caffery v. Choctaw Coal & Mining Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1902
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.