Baker v. Stonebraker
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Charles Circuit Court. I. The written assignment of the judgment by Fowler and Rogers to plaintiff was valid, and sufficient to authorize plaintiff to sue thereupon. It is not affected by the statute of this State, R. O. 1855, p. 907, § 38. That statute was first enacted Dec. 1,1855 ; the assignment bears date Oct. 27, 1848. Nor is it affected by the statute of Maryland.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Charles Circuit Court. I. The written assignment of the judgment by Fowler and Rogers to plaintiff was valid, and sufficient to authorize plaintiff to sue thereupon. It is not affected by the statute of this State, R. O. 1855, p. 907, § 38. That statute was first enacted Dec. 1,1855 ; the assignment bears date Oct. 27, 1848. Nor is it affected by the statute of Maryland. That statute is to compel assignments of judgments in a certain class of cases ; it has no reference to voluntary assignments of them in any other sort of cases. The assignability of the judgment, like that of…
1Opinion of the CourtBates, Judge
This was a suit upon a judgment rendered by a court of record of the State of Maryland. The suit there was docketed in the name of “ George McCullough, use of John Baker, use of Thomas H. Fowler and Samuel J. Rogers,” and judgment given for the plaintiff. Experts in the law and practice of the courts of Maryland proved that such an entry on the docket of a use entitled cestui que use to the ownership and entire control of the judgment. The petition in the present case stated that said judgment had been regularly assigned to plaintiff for good and valuable considerations, and at the trial the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Warren ex rel. Warren v. LuskSupreme Court of Missouri · 1852
3Cited by2 opinions
- Edgerton v. EdgertonMontana Supreme Court · 1892
- Rumfelt v. O'BrienSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874