Ex parte Fearle
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR. TO CHARITON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The title to the §100 collected by the sheriff on the execution in favor of Spicer, on the same day the judgment was assigned to Shephard, even assuming that the collection was made before the assignment, did not vest in Spicer, so as to subject it to a levy under an execution against him.
Read the full summary
ERROR. TO CHARITON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The title to the §100 collected by the sheriff on the execution in favor of Spicer, on the same day the judgment was assigned to Shephard, even assuming that the collection was made before the assignment, did not vest in Spicer, so as to subject it to a levy under an execution against him. Turner v. Fendall, 1 Cranch, 117 ; First v. Miller, 4 Bibb, 311 ; Jones v. Ramsey, 2 Richardson’s R. 4. And therefore Shephard took the judgment unincumbered by any lien, and was entitled to the proceeds of the exe-' cution issued thereon, and the court erred in ordering…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, J.
Tbe opinion of tbe Circuit Court, in ordering tbe sum of one hundred dollars to be paid over to Fearle & Lewis, seems to bave been based upon tbe fact tbat tbis sum was paid to tbe sheriff on tbe same day on which the assignment to Shephard was made, and tbat, consequently, tbe lien of the execution attached before tbe assignment could transfer the property. Wo presume, tbat if tbe assignment had been held void, because of fraud, the court would bave directed tbe entire amount of tbe execution to bave been paid over.
Tbe case of Turner v. Tindall, 1 Cranch. 42, seems to bold tbe doctrino, tbat…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Roseberry v. American Benevolent Ass'nMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Bank of Minnesota v. HayesMontana Supreme Court · 1892
- State ex rel. Wilson v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Eaton v. McElhoneCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1897