Legal Opinion

Cody v. Vaughan

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 14, 1893PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from, the Greene Circuit Court. — Hon. W. D. Hubbard, Judge. (1) The testimony shows that the repairs on the boiler in controversy were to be charged into the general account of Cunningham & Murphy against Cody & Filley, and to be paid for either in work done by Cody & Filley, or one of them, or on settlement at some future day, in cash. Under such a state of facts no lien could exist.

Read the full summary

Appeal from, the Greene Circuit Court. — Hon. W. D. Hubbard, Judge. (1) The testimony shows that the repairs on the boiler in controversy were to be charged into the general account of Cunningham & Murphy against Cody & Filley, and to be paid for either in work done by Cody & Filley, or one of them, or on settlement at some future day, in cash. Under such a state of facts no lien could exist. Tucker v. Taylor, 53 Ind. 95; 3-Parsons on Contracts, p. 248, note w; 2 CMtty on Contracts [11 Am. Ed.] p. 802; 4 Wait’s Actions & Defenses, p. 334. (2) An artisan’s lien is a personal privilege, not…

1Opinion of the CourtRombauer, P. J.

— This is an action of replevin, by which the plaintiff seeks to recover from the defendant one steam boiler and its appurtenances. The defendant is the statutory assignee of Cunningham & Murphy, and filed two.answers in the case. By the first answer he claims to be owner of the property as assignee of Cunningham & Murphy under the general assignment statute. By his amended answer he says that the boiler was delivered by the plaintiff to his assignors to be repaired under a contract by which they were authorized to repair the same and sell it, deducting from the proceeds of sale the cost of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Walker v. OwenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
  2. Nanson v. JacobSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  3. Eppright v. KauffmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
  4. Eppright v. NickersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
  5. Trigg v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Marks v. DavisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
  2. Deming Co. v. WebbMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API