Haven v. Foley
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. This was an action for the" recovery of personal property or its value. The defence set up in the answer is stated in the opinion of the court, delivered when the cause was formerly here. 18 Mo. Rep. 186. The case now comes here after a trial upon the issue made by the answer.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. This was an action for the" recovery of personal property or its value. The defence set up in the answer is stated in the opinion of the court, delivered when the cause was formerly here. 18 Mo. Rep. 186. The case now comes here after a trial upon the issue made by the answer. The defendants read in evidence the deed of trust given by James Shepard to secure E. H. Shepard, as his indorser, upon the two notes made by him to Emerson, and also the assignment of the said deed of trust and of the property therein described, by E. H. Shepard and the…
1Opinion of the CourtGamble, Judge
1. When this cause was formerly in this court, it was held that Emerson, as the holder of the notes of James Shepard, indorsed by Elihu H. Shepard, was entitled to the benefit of any counter security given by James Shepard to Elihu H. Shepard, his security upon the notes. It Ayas further held *635that, if by the agreement between Emerson, Elihu H. Shepard and Eoley & Papin, and the acts of the parties under such agreement, E. & P. became the creditors of James Shepard, substituted for Emerson, then E. & P. became entitled to the counter security, which had been given to Elihu PL Shepard.
2. The…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Seibert v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Berthold v. BertholdSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- Zook v. ClemmerIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- South Omaha National Bank v. WrightNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Orden v. DurhamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868