Hackett v. Watts
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. — Hon. William S. Herndon, Judge. (1) The court erred in permitting plaintiffs to prove their contract with Watts by parol testimony; that contract, so far as it was intended to create a lien upon the land in question to indemnify plaintiffs as sureties upon Watts’ note to the bank, was clearly within the operation of the .statute of frauds, and no action can be maintained upon it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. — Hon. William S. Herndon, Judge. (1) The court erred in permitting plaintiffs to prove their contract with Watts by parol testimony; that contract, so far as it was intended to create a lien upon the land in question to indemnify plaintiffs as sureties upon Watts’ note to the bank, was clearly within the operation of the .statute of frauds, and no action can be maintained upon it. E. S., sec. 5186; Curie’s Heirs v. Eddy, 24 Mo. 117-122; O’Neil v. Capelle, 62 Mo. 203-209; Wooldridge v. Scott, 69 Mo. 669; Chambers v. Lecompte, 9 Mo. 575; Price v. Courtney, 87…
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.
This is an action by plaintiffs to recover against the defendant Watts the sum of $5,586.65, paid by them to the Watson Bank as surety for said Watts; to be subrogated to the rights of said bank in and to a certain contract for the purchase of a tract of land therein described, one life policy of insurance and four hundred shares of stock 'in the Sioux *507Yalley Stone Company, deposited by said Watts with said bank as collateral security for said debt; to set aside a certain deed from the Missouri Wesleyan Institute to the defendant Bickel for said land; that he be declared to hold title to same…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Benne v. SchneckoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
- Springer v. KleinsorgeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Allen v. RichardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Furnold v. Bank of the StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- Price v. CourtneySupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- International Harvester Co. of America v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1906
- Frame v. Boatmen's Bank of Concord VillageMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989
- Jones v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1933
- Hurt v. FordSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Hillman v. AllenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.