Field v. Langsdorf
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. A general statement of the facts in this case will be found in 36 Mo. 441. The facts now presented are different from the last transcript. In this record it appears beyond all doubt that there was an absolute sale and transfer of the whole stock of goods.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. A general statement of the facts in this case will be found in 36 Mo. 441. The facts now presented are different from the last transcript. In this record it appears beyond all doubt that there was an absolute sale and transfer of the whole stock of goods. The mere fact that the purchaser directs a levy upon his own goods, after they are in the possession of the constable under an attachment, is undoubtedly evidence, “and a circumstance going strongly” against him, but may be explained. This explanation is conclusively furnished in this record. They are…
1Opinion of the CourtBaker, Judge
This case has been here before, and will he found reported in 36 Mo. 441, where a full statement of it can be seen. It is unnecessary to restate it here. The testimony is substantially as it was then. The only material difference consists in testimony introduced by the respondents tending to show that the plaintiffs did not intend to abandon their alleged purchase of the goods in question by taking out an execution on the judgment in their favor against Meirand and having the same levied on the goods as his property; that they were advised by their attorney that it would not affect their…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Anchor Milling Co. v. WalshMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Kolsky v. LovemanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892