R. L. McDonald & Co. v. E. Fist & Co.
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. cited: Henderson vs. Drace, 30 Mo., 358; Jasper county vs. Chenault, 38 Mo., 357 ; Tevis vs. Hughes, 10 Mo., 380 ; 1 W. S.,. 183, § 9. I. This is not the case of a defective bond. It is one in which the paper claimed to be a bond is a nullity. The statute expressly- requires, that the bond shall be executed by some one as principal, and the mode pointed out by the statute must be strictly followed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. cited: Henderson vs. Drace, 30 Mo., 358; Jasper county vs. Chenault, 38 Mo., 357 ; Tevis vs. Hughes, 10 Mo., 380 ; 1 W. S.,. 183, § 9. I. This is not the case of a defective bond. It is one in which the paper claimed to be a bond is a nullity. The statute expressly- requires, that the bond shall be executed by some one as principal, and the mode pointed out by the statute must be strictly followed. (Stevenson vs. Eobbins, 5 Mo., .18; Drake Attach., §§-115, Í17, 121; 124.)
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, Judge
This was an attachment suit originally commenced in the ' Cameron Court of Common Pleas, and transferred to the Circuit Court of Clinton county by the act abolishing the Common Pleas.
The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the attachment *344upon die alleged ground, tliat no attachment bond had been filed before the writ was issued.
The record shows that there was an attachment bond filed and approved by the clerk of the court at the time the attachment was iséued. This bond purports to be signed by the plaintiff, E. L. McDonald, as principal, per James Wilson, and Thomas E. Einney as-surety.
When…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Henderson v. DraceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- Tevis v. HughesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1847
- Jasper County v. ChenaultSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
3Cited by3 opinions
- Claflin v. HooverMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Whitman Agricultural Ass'n v. National Railway, Electric & Industrial Ass'nMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
- Wirt v. DinanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891