State ex rel. Mosher v. Bennett
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. This was a suit upon a penal bond taken by the sheriff of St. Louis county, under the local act of March 3, 1855, to recover the value of goods of plaintiff Mosher, seized by virtue of an attachment in favor of Russell & Bennett, and against Pollard, Anno & Co. The answer of defendants denied the title of Mother, and alleged that he was but the agent of Pollard, Anno & Co., to whom the goods belonged.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. This was a suit upon a penal bond taken by the sheriff of St. Louis county, under the local act of March 3, 1855, to recover the value of goods of plaintiff Mosher, seized by virtue of an attachment in favor of Russell & Bennett, and against Pollard, Anno & Co. The answer of defendants denied the title of Mother, and alleged that he was but the agent of Pollard, Anno & Co., to whom the goods belonged. The cause being set for the 8th of November, the defendants made a second application for a continuance of the cause on the ground of the absence of…
1Opinion of the CourtBates, Judge
This case was heretofore submitted to the court, and an opinion prepared by Judge Napton, in which Judge Ewing concurred, (Judge Scott being absent,) but no judgment was entered; now the parties have agreed that that opinion shall *464stand as the decision of the court. Therefore, in accordance with that opinion, the judgment below is affirmed,
all the judges concurring. Napton, Judge.
The only question in this case is as to the propriety of overruling the defendant’s motion for a continuance. There had, it would seem from the affidavit itself, (though the record does not show it,) been a previous…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. WhitecottenWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1926
- State v. LangeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875