Crane v. Noel
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.— Eon. Warivick Hough, Judge. (1) One .who pays the debt of another without the knowledge or request of that other, is a volunteer, and as such, in the absence of an assignment of the claim to him, is not entitled to subrogation or indemnity. Norton y.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.— Eon. Warivick Hough, Judge. (1) One .who pays the debt of another without the knowledge or request of that other, is a volunteer, and as such, in the absence of an assignment of the claim to him, is not entitled to subrogation or indemnity. Norton y. Highleyman, 88 Mo. 621; Wolf v. Walter, 56 Mo. 293; Evans v. Halleck, 83 Mo. 376; Price v. Courtney, 87 Mo. 387; Wooldridge v. Scott, 69 Mo. 669 ; St. Francis Mill Co., v. Sugg,.83 Mo. 476; Anglade v. St. Avit, 67 Mo. 434; Aetna Life v. Middleport, 124 U. S. 534. Bispham on Equity (3 Ed.), par. 337. (2)…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
(after stating the facts as above).— The judgment in this case is assailed from the premises that the agreed facts show the respondent was a volunteer in becoming surety and in making good to the insurance company any defalcation that occurred during Levy’s agency.
*127The agreed statement of facts says respondent was appointed agent for the insurance company prior to the accrual of Levy’s indebtedness; that he contracted to become surety for the latter and the appellants, and to pay whatever premiums they failed to pay; but that appellant Noel and Cohn had no knowledge of the arrangement. It is…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. MiddleportSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Bunn v. LindsaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- Mathews v. . AikinNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
- Norton v. HighleymanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- Hough v. Ætna Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1870
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bobier v. HornSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Cape Girardeau Bell Telephone Co. v. Estate of HamilMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911