Holliday v. Sterling
Supreme Court of Missouri
tUppeal from St. Louis Circuit Cou/ri. cited Alexander vs. Harrison, 38 Mo., 258. cited Drake Attach., § 87 ; 8 Porter, 250; 18 Wend., 611; 7 Darb.. 656; Walser vs. Thies, 56 Mo., 89; Hall vs. Lnydam, 6 Barb.. 83; Hill. Torts, 431; Morris vs. Corson, 7 Cow., 281 ; 2 Green!. Ev., 454; 1 Hill. Torts, 428, § 16 ; Nicholson vs. Coghill, 43 B. & C., 21; Burhans vs. Sanford, 19 Wend., 417; Webb vs. Hill, 1 Moody & Malkin, 253 ; Williams vs. Taylor, 6 Bing., 183.
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
This case was an action for a malicious attachment, and it appears from the record, that the defendants brought the suit against the plaintiff in the name of one Toll, for a balance of five hundred dollars alleged to have been due on a promissory note. Before a trial was had, they dismissed the proceedings. The petition in this case averred, that the defendants were not employed nor authorized by Toll to bring the suit, and that the note, on which it was founded, was paid off. In their answer the defendant set up, that Toll did authorize and employ them to bring the suit.
Toll was examined as…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Vinal v. CoreWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1881
- Moody v. DeutschSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Lemay v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1877
- Casebeer v. RiceNebraska Supreme Court · 1885
- Collins v. ShannonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886