Loeffler v. Damoree Bros.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Clinton Circuit Court. — Hon. W. S. Herndon, Judge. The transaction in question, as disclosed by the evidence, never amounted to a sale. It was a proposed sale and that only. If it did not amount to a sale then it did not come within the provision of either section 5178 or 5180 of the statutes, as the trial court supposed and held.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Clinton Circuit Court. — Hon. W. S. Herndon, Judge. The transaction in question, as disclosed by the evidence, never amounted to a sale. It was a proposed sale and that only. If it did not amount to a sale then it did not come within the provision of either section 5178 or 5180 of the statutes, as the trial court supposed and held. At all events,.as to whether or not it was a sale, and if a sale, a sale for cash or on time, and if for cash as to whether or not cash payment was waived, were all questions of fact to be determined by the jury, and for that reason the court erred…
1Opinion of the Court
Ellison, J. —
The plaintiff was a creditor of defendants and brought suit against them by attachment and attached as their property a lot of butcher’s tools. Interpleader- filed his interplea claiming the property as his. Plaintiff claims that interpleader sold and delivered the property to defendants before he attached them, with a condition attached to the sale that they should remain the property of interpleader until paid for. Interpleader claims that he did not sell them at all, but loaned them to defendants until they could make arrangements for purchasing them as per an agreement…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Collins v. WilhoitSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
3Cited by1 opinion
- Frizzell v. Stewart Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1931