Hays v. Merkle
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — IIon. Daniel D. Eisher, Judge. The action of defendant’s attorneys in bringing the re- . plevin suit of Richard Merkle v. W. W. Hays and Sullivan & Steinmetz, in the district court of Sedgwick county, Kan-, sas, in which the judgment was rendered that is the subject of litigation herein, was ratified by defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — IIon. Daniel D. Eisher, Judge. The action of defendant’s attorneys in bringing the re- . plevin suit of Richard Merkle v. W. W. Hays and Sullivan & Steinmetz, in the district court of Sedgwick county, Kan-, sas, in which the judgment was rendered that is the subject of litigation herein, was ratified by defendant. Defendant and his general attorney in St. Louis, were advised, after defendant’s son had authorized the institution of the replevin suits in the district court of Sedgwick county, Kansas, that the deposition which defendant’s general…
1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.
This is the second appeal in this case. The opinion of the first appeal (67 Mo. App. 55) contains a full statement of the case. It is only necessary to repeat that the suit is based on a judgment obtained against the defendant in the district court for Sedgwick county, Kansas. The judgment was entered for the value of certain goods which *387had been replevied in the case of Merkle v. Hays. That suit was brought in the name of Richard Merkle, the defendant herein, by Houston and Bentley, attorneys. In the present action Merkle denied the authority of Houston and Bentley to institute the replevin…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hays v. MerkleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
3Cited by2 opinions
- Plymouth Cordage Co. v. YeargainMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Schaff v. PetersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905