Shotwell v. McElhinney
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis County Circuit Court. — Hon. W. W. Edwards, Judge.' (1) Upon the pleadings, the deed sought to be set aside is clearly and absolutely void as against the appellant, who stands in the place of a creditor existing at the time.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis County Circuit Court. — Hon. W. W. Edwards, Judge.' (1) Upon the pleadings, the deed sought to be set aside is clearly and absolutely void as against the appellant, who stands in the place of a creditor existing at the time. R. S. 1879, p. 417, sec. 2497; Gentry v. Robinson, 55 Mo. 260; Lionberger v. Balter, 88 Mo. 447; Reinhart v. Long, 95 Mo. 401. (2) The deed read in evidence by the grantee does not bring him within the qualifications of section 2498. Bonny :o. Taylor, 90 Mo. 63. (3) The deed of appellant is good in equity as against the conveyance to Kenneth…
1Opinion of the CourtBrace, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of St. Louis county upon an issue raised between appellant McElhinney and Kenneth Shotwell, two of the defendants in a partition suit pending in that court, as to which of them was entitled to the interest of William B. Shotwell in the lands of his father, John Shotwell, Sr., deceased, situate in said county, sought therein to be divided.
Kenneth Shotwell claimed the interest by virtue of a deed from his brother, dated August 13, 1884, and recorded August 18, 1886. The issue was raised by the answer of the appellant, who claimed the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Maxwell v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Fretwell v. LaffoonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- State v. ButlerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Cook v. St. Louis & Keokuk RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Snyder v. BurnhamSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. KeithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893
- Bresnan v. GroganMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898