Knapp v. Publishers George Knapp & Co.
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. D. D.. Eisher, Judge. The statement of facts by the referee, mentioned', in the opinion of the court in banc, is as follows: It appears that in and prior to 1864, G-eorge Knapp, Nathaniel Paschall and John Knapp were equal co-partners under the firm name of G-eorge Knapp &■ Company, engaged in the business of newspaper, book and job printing, and well known as publishers of the Missouri Republican in St. Louis; that in April…
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. D. D.. Eisher, Judge. The statement of facts by the referee, mentioned', in the opinion of the court in banc, is as follows: It appears that in and prior to 1864, G-eorge Knapp, Nathaniel Paschall and John Knapp were equal co-partners under the firm name of G-eorge Knapp &■ Company, engaged in the business of newspaper, book and job printing, and well known as publishers of the Missouri Republican in St. Louis; that in April of that year these members of said firm, in conformity with the provisions of the Missouri act of Eebruary 15,1864,. for…
1Opinion of the CourtBarclay, J.
This case came to the court in banc from the second division, after an opinion for reversal had been rendered (27 S. W. Rep. 334).
A motion for rehearing was made in that division, but was not decided, except inferentially by the transfer of the cause to the court in bam. It has been fully reconsidered here, with the aid of able arguments by counsel.
The litigation arises from the facts which appear in the statement preceding this opinion.
The action was, at the outset, an ordinary one at law, by plaintiff, as personal representative of the old firm of George Knapp & Company, against the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Gibbons v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Gray v. President of the Portland BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Jones v. MorrisonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Eidman v. BowmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1871
- Lane v. EwingSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Stokes v. . Continental Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1906
- Hayes v. St. Louis Union Trust Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1927
- In re MeekerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1929
- Maynard v. Doe Run Lead Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1924
- Githens v. Butler CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1942
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.