McConnell v. Story & Clark Piano Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from, the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis. — Hon. Wilson A. Taylor, Judge. (1) Either under the Attachment or Garnishment Act a claimant may interplead. R. S. 1909, section 2345; R. S. section 2421. But since there seems to he some confusion as to whether or not a claimant may interplead under these sections in garnishment under execution, in the case at bar, upon motion of the plaintiff, the claimant was ordered by the court to interplead.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis. — Hon. Wilson A. Taylor, Judge. (1) Either under the Attachment or Garnishment Act a claimant may interplead. R. S. 1909, section 2345; R. S. section 2421. But since there seems to he some confusion as to whether or not a claimant may interplead under these sections in garnishment under execution, in the case at bar, upon motion of the plaintiff, the claimant was ordered by the court to interplead. As to a discussion df said confusion see the following decisions of this branch of our appellate court: Schawacker v. Dempsey, 83 Mo. App.…
1Opinion of the CourtBecker, J.
Appellant was interpleader below in a garnishment proceeding under execution, having been brought into the case on plaintiff’s motion on the order of the trial court under authority of section 2439, Revised Statutes of Missouri, 1909.
At the close of the plaintiff’s case on a hearing of the interplea before the court and a jury, plaintiff took an involuntary nonsuit with leave to set same aside, and judgment was accordingly rendered in favor of the interpleader and against the plaintiff. Thereafter plaintiff filed his motion to set aside the involuntary nonsuit and grant a new trial on the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Norman v. EastburnSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- O'Reilly v. ClearyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1879