Mead v. McLaughlin
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Fifth District Court. I. The debts of plaintiff were cash debts, and were taken up and satisfied in part by notes of Huxley, the purchaser ; and the balance of the purchase money, not so paid by Huxley, he paid to the trustee, in cash.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Fifth District Court. I. The debts of plaintiff were cash debts, and were taken up and satisfied in part by notes of Huxley, the purchaser ; and the balance of the purchase money, not so paid by Huxley, he paid to the trustee, in cash. The notes given by Huxley, in part satisfaction of the notes of Mead, were received by the owners of the notes of Mead, secured by the deed of trust, in full payment óf ■ the same; and the notes thus paid were delivered over to the trustee, which was a cash payment. (Appleton v. Kennon, 19 Mo. 637; 10 Barb. 372; 10 N. Y. 440; St. John v. Purdy, 1…
1Opinion of the CourtFagg, Judge
This is an application on the part of the respondent to be permitted to redeem certain property, situate in the city of St. Joseph, which had been sold by McLaughlin under the authority of a deed of trust, and purchased by Huxley; and also containing a prayer for an account of the rents and profits of the same from the day of sale. The, judgment of the Court of Common Pleas being for the defendant below, the same was reversed, upon a writ of error to the Fifth District Court, and the cause is now brought here by appeal. It appears that the deed under which the sale was made was executed by…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Orr v. RodeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. Liberdar Holding Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- Coney v. LairdSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- Lytton Manufacturing Co. v. House Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Barnes v. StoneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.