Ferd Heim Brewing Co. v. Linck
Missouri Court of Appeals
.Appeal from the Platte Circuit Cowrt. — Hon. James M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) The contract of March 25, 1890, between Metta & Kenna and Linek was void as to the creditors of Linek. Revised Statutes, 1889, sec. 5180; Swimpfield v. Hedge, 38 Mo. App. 52; Whitcomb v. Woodsworth, 54 Yt. 544; Machine Co. v. Holcomb, 40 Iowa, 33. (2) 'The court erred in instructing the jury that the contract was one of agency.
Read the full summary
.Appeal from the Platte Circuit Cowrt. — Hon. James M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) The contract of March 25, 1890, between Metta & Kenna and Linek was void as to the creditors of Linek. Revised Statutes, 1889, sec. 5180; Swimpfield v. Hedge, 38 Mo. App. 52; Whitcomb v. Woodsworth, 54 Yt. 544; Machine Co. v. Holcomb, 40 Iowa, 33. (2) 'The court erred in instructing the jury that the contract was one of agency. (3) Under the extrinsic facts in the case, the court should have submitted to the jury whether or not the contract was one of agency •or of sale. Thompson on Trials, sec. 1083. (4) The term…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
As near as we can tell from the imperfect abstract before us this was an action of attachment brought by the plaintiff against the defendant Linek, in which Metta &Kenna were interpleaders. There was a trial on the interplea which resulted in a judgment for the interpleaders, from which plaintiff has appealed. The plaintiff contends that the written *481contract between the interpleaders and the defendant is void as to creditors. As this contract was admitted in evidence without objection, no question as to its validity arises unless presented by the instructions. The fifth instruction asked by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Eidson v. HedgerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
3Cited by2 opinions
- Globe Securities Co. v. Gardner Motor Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1935
- Briggs v. FosterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905