Noyes, Norman & Co. v. Cunningham
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Daviess Circuit Court. — Hon. C. H. S. Goodman, Judge. (1) The instruction closes outside of the law and issues in the case, by engrafting an intention of hindering or delaying creditors, while a fraudulent transfer of the goods so as to hinder or delay creditors is enough. (2) Instruction 6 is a comment on the testimony in an aggravated form. State v. Sivils, 105 Mo. 534-5, and cases there cited; Weil v. Schwarts, 21 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Daviess Circuit Court. — Hon. C. H. S. Goodman, Judge. (1) The instruction closes outside of the law and issues in the case, by engrafting an intention of hindering or delaying creditors, while a fraudulent transfer of the goods so as to hinder or delay creditors is enough. (2) Instruction 6 is a comment on the testimony in an aggravated form. State v. Sivils, 105 Mo. 534-5, and cases there cited; Weil v. Schwarts, 21 Mo. App. 382; Jones v. Jones, 57 Mo. 142. (3) In any case where a party is making fraudulent disposition of his property so as to hinder .or delay any of his…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
This was an action of attachment grounded upon the eighth clause of section 521, Bevised Statutes. The defendants had judgment, and.the plaintiffs appealed. The plaintiffs principally complain here of the action of the trial court in respect to the giving and refusing of instructions. The fifth instruction given for the defendants told the jury that the possession of the good's by defendant,. W. H. Cunningham, was prima facie evidence of ownership by him, and put the *196burden of proof on plaintiffs to show that the transfer was wrongful and fraudulent as against plaintiffs, and was made with…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Rothschild v. American Central InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Jones v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Forrester v. MooreSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Raysdon v. TrumboSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Douglass v. CissnaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Gens & Tiede v. Hargadine, McKittrick & Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1894
- Dunham-Buckley & Co. v. HalbergMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
- Gharst v. St. Louis Transit Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Gage v. MearsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Clayton v. ClarkSupreme Court of Kansas · 1907
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.