Sampson v. Mitchell
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Audrain Circuit Court. — Hon. E. M. Hughes, Judge. (1) John H. Sampson, as the trustee of an express trust under the will of Richard Sampson, deceased, was the proper party to- take such steps as might be necessary for the protection of the interests of his beneficiaries, when the trust property was threatened with a sale at a sacrifice under the tax judgment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Audrain Circuit Court. — Hon. E. M. Hughes, Judge. (1) John H. Sampson, as the trustee of an express trust under the will of Richard Sampson, deceased, was the proper party to- take such steps as might be necessary for the protection of the interests of his beneficiaries, when the trust property was threatened with a sale at a sacrifice under the tax judgment. R. S. 1889, sec. 1991; Anderson v. Mather, 44 N. Y. 249; Clarice v. Van Surlay, 15 Wend. 436; Cochran v. Van Surlay, 20 Wend. 375; Pitcher v. Carter, 4 Sand. Ch. 1. (2) The Boone circuit court sitting as a court of chancery,…
1ConcurrenceBurgess, J.
I fully concur in all that is said by Black; C. J., in the foregoing opinion, with the exception of the third and last paragraph.
The proof clearly shows that the money borrowed by the trustee, Sampson, was applied to the payment of taxes which- were a lien upon the land in question, and as 'plaintiffs received the benefit of the money thus paid which served to extinguish the liens they should •in equity and good conscience be required to refund the same before taking possession of the land, and this, too; notwithstanding the answer sets up no such defense. ’That in this case would be but…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Emmert v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Crippen v. ChappelSupreme Court of Kansas · 1886
- Levy v. MartinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
- Chouteau v. GibsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- Schanewerk v. HoberechtSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.