Hohenthal v. Watson
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from, St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. Appellants submit the following points: I. The value of the property wrongfully taken from Watson by the writ of replevin is fixed by respondents’ petition, affidavit and bond, so as to be conclusive upon them. II. The verdict and judgment in the replevin suit show that Hohenthal was a mere wrongdoer, so far as relates to these goods. He had no title to them; he got $442 worth of goods, and ought to pay for them. III.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. Appellants submit the following points: I. The value of the property wrongfully taken from Watson by the writ of replevin is fixed by respondents’ petition, affidavit and bond, so as to be conclusive upon them. II. The verdict and judgment in the replevin suit show that Hohenthal was a mere wrongdoer, so far as relates to these goods. He had no title to them; he got $442 worth of goods, and ought to pay for them. III. Hohenthal has no equity here; he has been helping, or trying to help, Blum to defraud his creditors, and has no right to complain…
1Opinion of the CourtBates, Judge
Watson, a constable, had an execution against one Blum, and under it seized personal property. Hohenthal sued Watson for the property so seized, and under the provisions of the statute in respect to the claim and delivery of personal property received possession of it. At the trial of that case judgment was given for the defendant Watson, against Hohenthal and his securities, for the value of the property, which value exceeded the amorurt of the execution against Blum. Execution was issued upon the judgment, and this suit was brought by the defendants in the execution to enjoin the collection…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hohenthal v. WatsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1859