Lillibridge v. Ross
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from, Andrew Circuit Court. I. The case of Peak vs. Langhlin, (49 Mo., 162.) is a case directly in point and settles this ease. Lillibridge’s rights in this case were no more effected by Ross using his name without his knowledge or consent, than if his name had not been used at all in the partition suit. In either case the decree and sale under it were void as to him, and he could successfully attack them in any collateral proceeding.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Andrew Circuit Court. I. The case of Peak vs. Langhlin, (49 Mo., 162.) is a case directly in point and settles this ease. Lillibridge’s rights in this case were no more effected by Ross using his name without his knowledge or consent, than if his name had not been used at all in the partition suit. In either case the decree and sale under it were void as to him, and he could successfully attack them in any collateral proceeding. (Smith vs. Ross & Strong, 7 Mo., 463; Galahan vs. Gates, 20 Mo., 236; Edgell vs. Sigerson, 20 Mo., 494; Smith vs. McOutchen, 38 Mo., 417; Higgins vs.…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
This was an equitable proceeding to set aside a judgment rendered in partition and a sale made thereunder.
It was alleged in the bill in substance that the plaintiff and some of the defendants were owners, as tenants in common, of a piece of land, and that defendant, Ross, caused a suit in partition to be brought and a decree rendered for the sale thereof, and that the same was sold without any notice, legal or otherwise, having been given to plaintiff, and that plaintiff had no knowledge thereof, until he ascertained the fact after the sale, and that the decree was procured by the fraudulent…
2Cited by2 opinions
- McDonald v. McAlilySupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Cole v. Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1886