Wabash Railroad v. Bowring
Missouri Court of Appeals
•Appeal from Johnson Circuit Court. — Row. W. L. Jarrott, Judge. (1) Neither the animal here sued for, nor the judgment in favor of Bowring for $225, is specifically exempt from execution, and hence such an exemption could not pass from Bowring to W. J. Hollis, by assignment, so as to destroy the existing equitable, as well as common-law and statutory, right of set-off in plaintiff’s favor.
Read the full summary
•Appeal from Johnson Circuit Court. — Row. W. L. Jarrott, Judge. (1) Neither the animal here sued for, nor the judgment in favor of Bowring for $225, is specifically exempt from execution, and hence such an exemption could not pass from Bowring to W. J. Hollis, by assignment, so as to destroy the existing equitable, as well as common-law and statutory, right of set-off in plaintiff’s favor. State v. Jungling, 116 Mo. 162. (2) Exemption of property from execution is a personal privilege, and can only be exercised when the officer calls with the writ, or makes a levy, and then only for the…
1Opinion
SUPPLETORY OPINION, ON REHEARING.
SMITH, P. J.
— The plaintiff’s judgment antedated that of the defendant, and the moment the latter was recovered, the defendant being insolvent, the plaintiff’s equitable right of set-off attached to it and became a right which a court of equity, when its interference is appropriately invoked, will enforce.
The mere fact that the plaintiff and defendant Bow-ring each had a judgment against the other was not suf*166ficient to justify a set-off in equity. A set-off is ordinarily allowed in equity only where the party seeking the benefit of it can show some equitable…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Barnes v. McMullinsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Burnett v. CrandallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Aull v. St. Louis Trust Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- McBride v. FallonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Marshall v. CooperCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1875
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.