Carr v. Dawes
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Buchanan Circuit Court. — Hon. Oliver M. Spencer, Judge. (1) Appellant’s avoidance of the statute was good. R. S. 1879, sec. 3236 ; Rhodes v. Farish, 16 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Buchanan Circuit Court. — Hon. Oliver M. Spencer, Judge. (1) Appellant’s avoidance of the statute was good. R. S. 1879, sec. 3236 ; Rhodes v. Farish, 16 Mo. App. 430; Adams, Adm'r, v. Abernathy, 37 Mo. 196; Johnson v. Smith, 43 Mo. 499; Miller v. Tyler, 61 Mo. 401. (2) Defendant’s answer to a bill of discovery is evidence in support of the allegations in his bill. 2' Daniels’ Ch. PI. & Prac. [5 Ed.] 1537; Story, Eq., sec. 1483. The code of civil procedure has abolished the distinction in practice between law and equity, and with, it the bill of discovery. Bond v. Worley, 26…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
This was a suit begun by plaintiff .against defendant in the circuit court of Buchanan county on a promissory note. The answer pleaded in bar the ten years’ statute of limitation. The replication, in avoidance of the bar of the statute pleaded, set forth that the said note, was executed and indorsed in this state where the defendant, who was the indorser thereof, was a citizen and resided ; that he was then a single man, had no family and was not a housekeeper, boarded at hotels and temporary boarding-houses, and had no place called his usual abode, so that process could not be served upon…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Williams v. Circuit Court of St. Louis countySupreme Court of Missouri · 1838
- Nelson v. GhiselinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Eck ex rel. Taylor v. HatcherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Ragan v. McCoySupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- Richmond's v. Wardlaw & PogueSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Curtiss v. BellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Dustin v. FarrellyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
- Harwood v. GermanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1892
- Lilly-Brackett Co. v. SonnemannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910