McKittrick v. Clemens
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The defense unsupported by an actual elaim set up by Barlow himself, is no defense. (30 Mo., 258; G. S., 514, §; 9, 569, § 52.) Cutter recovered the damages as trustee for Barlow. (Van Rensellaer vs. Owen, 48 Barb., S. C., 61.) If the plaintiff objected to this defense, the answer of the garnishee should have excepted to as insufficient.
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, Judge
The plaintiff, in March, 1865, recovered a judgment against Norman Cutter in the St. Louis Circuit Court for six thousand five hundred dollars, and afterwards in 1865, the defendants were garnisheed as debtors of said Norman Cutter upon an execution issued upon this judgment. Interrogatories were filed touching their indebtedness and duly answered, and issues joined presenting the question for our determination.
The facts are, that Norman Cutter, in 1846, commenced an action of ejectment in the St. Louis Circuit Court against the defendants for what is known as the Lirette arpent which…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Orvis v. ElliottMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
- First National Bank v. GriffithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1916
- Stagg v. Eureka Tanning & Currying Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Taylor v. DollinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1920
- Groschke v. BardenheimerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1884
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.