Christy v. Chicago, Burlington & Kansas City Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Putnam Circuit Court. — Hon. Andrew Ellison, Judge. (1) - The administratrix had no authority to assign the stipulation. It was not a note or bond, within the meaning of the latter part of section 209 of article 9, chapter 1, Revised Statutes, 1889. Stagg v. Linnenfelser, 59 Mo. 336; Weil v. Jones, 70 Mo. 560; Richardson v. Dreyfus, 64 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Putnam Circuit Court. — Hon. Andrew Ellison, Judge. (1) - The administratrix had no authority to assign the stipulation. It was not a note or bond, within the meaning of the latter part of section 209 of article 9, chapter 1, Revised Statutes, 1889. Stagg v. Linnenfelser, 59 Mo. 336; Weil v. Jones, 70 Mo. 560; Richardson v. Dreyfus, 64 Mo. App. 600-604. (2) The.assignment or sale of the contract was without any authority from the probate court, section 234 of article 10 of said chapter, and the compromise was made without approval of -the probate court. Sec. 235 of said art.…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
Plaintiffs were the attorneys for one Richard Jones in a suit which he instituted against defendant for killing one of his horses and were to receive ^a fee of $125. During the pendency of the protracted litigation Jones died and his widow was appointed administratrix of his estate and substituted as party plaintiff in that cause. Defendant then entered into a written agreement of settlement of the controversy between them as follows:
“Jones, Administratrix of Richard Jones, deceased, v. ^ The Chicago, Burlington & Kansas City Railway Company.
“It is hereby agreed between the parties hereto,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Huegel v. HuegelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932