State ex rel. Peirce v. Merritt
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. Merritt, Ronaldson & Co., on the 9th day of October, 1874, sued Brock, Rogers & Co., by attachment, and caused the writ to be levied on certain merchandise.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. Merritt, Ronaldson & Co., on the 9th day of October, 1874, sued Brock, Rogers & Co., by attachment, and caused the writ to be levied on certain merchandise. A few days afterwards Peirce claimed this merchandise as having been sold to him on the 7th day of October, 1874, by Brock, Rogers & Co. On the 15th day of October, 1874, Merritt, Ronaldson & Co., with their sureties, gave bond to the State of Missouri in the penal sum of $58,000, conditioned that Merritt, Ronaldson & Co. should indemnify the sheriff and defend all claims brought against the…
1Opinion of the Court
Henry, J. —
*2831. Attachment: intervention of bankruptcy proceedings: jurisdiction court of State court. *282We fully concur with the court of appeals *283that the jurisdiction-of the State court over .the subject matter of the suit, was not determined by the proceedings in bankruptcy against Brock, Rogers & Co., and we deem it unnecessary to add anything to the able 'argument of' Judge Gantt on. that subject, which'we refer to and adopt.*
2. fraud: sale out of the usual course of business. The court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury, at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence, that- upon -it…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Burgert v. BorchertSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
3Cited by8 opinions
- Dougherty v. CooperSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Claflin v. FoleyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1883
- Raalte v. HarringtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- State v. BayneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- State v. TurnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.