Broadwell & Dyer v. Yantis
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from Callaway Circuit Court. 1st. That the bill should be dismissed for these reasons : First — The prayers are multifarious and inconsistent, and cannot be united in the same bill. 9 Mo. R. 293. Second — The complainants ask a performance, and do not proifer or tender payment of the purchese money due for the lot. 2nd. That the vendor, Leiper, had a lien upon the estate sold to Nolly for the purchase money unpaid.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Callaway Circuit Court. 1st. That the bill should be dismissed for these reasons : First — The prayers are multifarious and inconsistent, and cannot be united in the same bill. 9 Mo. R. 293. Second — The complainants ask a performance, and do not proifer or tender payment of the purchese money due for the lot. 2nd. That the vendor, Leiper, had a lien upon the estate sold to Nolly for the purchase money unpaid. See 2 Sugden on Vendors, 62. A bond or note taken for purchase money will not affect the lien. Ibid, 67. So the lien continues to the assignee of the debt. 3rd. The…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, J.
This was a bill in chancery brought by Broadwell & Dyer in the Circuit Court of Callaway County against John L. Yantis. The facts alleged in the bill as the ground of the complaint are as follows : —
Tate & Nolly (a mercantile firm in Fulton,) being in possession of two lots in that town, numbered 177 and 178, which they had purchased of one Leiper, for $1050, and upon which purchase there was a balance due said Leiper of about $600, exchanged them with John L. Yantis for four lots then in his occupancy numbered 179, 180, 181 and 182, giving said Yantis, as the estimated difference in the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- McIlvaine v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Morgan v. BouseSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Jones v. HowardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897