Rice v. Dudley
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Daviess Circuit Court. — Hon. C. H. S. Goodman, Judge. The testimony of claimant Ashbrook shows conclusively that he did not accept the order in payment of the note. To have that effect it must be expressly agreed that it should be taken in satisfaction. Appleton v. Kenn on, 19 Mo. 637; Leabo v. Goode, 67 Mo. 126; Riggs v. Goodrich, 73 Mo. 108; Wiles v. Robinson, 80 Mo. 47; Banh v. Peterman, 21 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Daviess Circuit Court. — Hon. C. H. S. Goodman, Judge. The testimony of claimant Ashbrook shows conclusively that he did not accept the order in payment of the note. To have that effect it must be expressly agreed that it should be taken in satisfaction. Appleton v. Kenn on, 19 Mo. 637; Leabo v. Goode, 67 Mo. 126; Riggs v. Goodrich, 73 Mo. 108; Wiles v. Robinson, 80 Mo. 47; Banh v. Peterman, 21 Mo. App. 512. Plaintiff’s second, third, fourth and fifth instructions correctly declared the law. The relation between defendant Carter and Dudley, garnishee, was that of creditor and…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
Rice obtained a judgment against Carter in the circuit court of Daviess county on which an execution issued, and Dudley was summoned as a garnishee thereon.
Dudley answered the interrogatories which were propounded to him, stating that he had in his hands belonging to Carter the sum of $860.75 and that Ashbrook and others were claiming the amount as assignees of Carter and that Rice disputed the validity of the assignments.
The circuit court made an order on Ashbrook and the other claimants to appear and sustain their respective claims to the said fund in the hands of Dudley, the garnishee,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Mandeville v. WelchSupreme Court of the United States · 1820
- Chambers v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- Hamilton v. BoggessSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Leabo v. GoodeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Burnett v. CrandallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- McEwen v. Sterling State BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1928
- Taylor v. DollinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1920