Weil v. Tyler
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court. I. If the assignment of the due-bill by the defendant to Baehr was valid, the garnishee must be discharged. II. A note or due-bill payable in specific articles, in which no day or place of payment is mentioned, becomes due on a special demand of the articles specified at the debtor’s place of business, and such a contract becomes a money debt only after a demand and refusal to pay over the specified property.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court. I. If the assignment of the due-bill by the defendant to Baehr was valid, the garnishee must be discharged. II. A note or due-bill payable in specific articles, in which no day or place of payment is mentioned, becomes due on a special demand of the articles specified at the debtor’s place of business, and such a contract becomes a money debt only after a demand and refusal to pay over the specified property. The defendant having made no such demand, no right of action had accrued at the time the appellant was garnished — Chip. Contr. 28, 33-5,…
1Opinion of the Court
Wagner, Judge,,
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellant was summoned as garnishee of one Henry *546Bucking, and in his answer denied all indebtedness otherwise than upon a certain due-bill, of which the following is a copy:
“ St. Louis, Mo., November 16, 18601 Due Henry Bucking one thousand dollars in brandy at live dollars per gallon. We will let him have one or two barrels of fine whiskey on the above amount. This is for commissions. O. H. Tyler & Co.”
The due-bill was endorsed, and there was an interplea filed, but the issue was found against the claimant; and as it has no material…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In re AllenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1909
- Lobdell v. HopkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1826
- Smith v. Chapman & BrotherSupreme Court of Alabama · 1838
- Mims v. ParkerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1840
- Stadler, Bros. & Co. v. Parmlee & WattsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Brillhart v. Excess Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Lafayette County Bank v. MetcalfMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
- Spears v. BondSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Reinhart v. Empire Soap Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1888
- Holker v. HennesseySupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.