Hempler v. Schneider
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court. 1. The taking of a note by Hempler from Nauman, after bis return, was a satisfaction of tlie debt for which Schneider was security, and operated to discharge him. 2. The fictitious credits given by Hempler on the instrument sued on, did not give the law commissioner jurisdiction.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court. 1. The taking of a note by Hempler from Nauman, after bis return, was a satisfaction of tlie debt for which Schneider was security, and operated to discharge him. 2. The fictitious credits given by Hempler on the instrument sued on, did not give the law commissioner jurisdiction. Ramsay v. Court of Wardens, 2 Bay (S. C.) 180. Sanders v. Stratton, 2 Penn. 528. Coleman v. Purcell, ib. 561. Simpson v. Me Million, 1 Nott & McCord, 192. An agreement of the parties cannot give jurisdiction. Lindsey v. McClelland, 1 Bibb, 262. Bent’s Executors v.…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, Judge
This was an action commenced by Hempler, the plaintiff, against Schneider, on a note, in the German language, of which the following is a translation: “I, the undersigned, bind myself to pay to Heinrich Hempler, for Wilhelm Nauman, the sura of two hundred dollars, for goods received, in,case that Wilhelm Nauman does not return to St. Louis within fifty days from to-day. In case said goods should be damaged by fire or water, I do not hold myself bound to pay the above security ; for all such damages H. Hempler will alone bear the damages. '“CASPAR SCHNEIDER.
“ St. Louis co., 5th April, 1852.”
On…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Wolford v. PowersIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Burke & Aitcheson v. Adoue & LobitCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1893
- Lindell v. RokesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Matlack v. LareSupreme Court of Missouri · 1862
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. LevyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.