Elliott v. Keith
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court.- — Hon. Richard Field, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion. (1) The court erred in saying to the jury in defendant ’ s first instruction, that they must believe ‘ ‘ that the defendant was not only about to remove out of the state,” but “must also believe that defendant was preparing and intended to make an immediate removal.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court.- — Hon. Richard Field, Judge. The case is stated in the opinion. (1) The court erred in saying to the jury in defendant ’ s first instruction, that they must believe ‘ ‘ that the defendant was not only about to remove out of the state,” but “must also believe that defendant was preparing and intended to make an immediate removal.” Under the law (R. S., 1879, sec. 398, sub-div. 6) under which this attachment was sued out, appellant was entitled to an attachment if the defendant was “about to remove out of this state, with the intent to change his domicile.”…
1Opinion of the CourtRamsay, J.
— On September 5, 1887, plaintiff instituted suit before J. A. Prather, a justice of the peace of Lafayette county, on a note dated March 10, 1883, payable one day after date to S. W. Oreasey, plaintiff’s intestate, and filed an affidavit for an attachment in which he alleged as grounds of attachment: “1. That the defendant is about to remove out of this state with the intent to change his domicile. 2. That the defendant is about fraudulently to conceal, remove or dispose of his property or effects so as to hinder or delay his creditors. 3. That the defendant is about fraudulently to convey…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Myers v. FarrellMississippi Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by2 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Veeder v. State Board of EducationMontana Supreme Court · 1934
- White v. Kansas City Public Service Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1946