Erskine v. Loewenstein
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. This case comes before this court as a non-jury or ■equity case. The court below passed upon the facts as a court, and not as a jury, and the question is whether the finding was á right finding. The finding of the trial court was not only against the evidence, but was against the weight of the evidence. The question is not how the respondent originally received, but how he afterwards held the stock.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. This case comes before this court as a non-jury or ■equity case. The court below passed upon the facts as a court, and not as a jury, and the question is whether the finding was á right finding. The finding of the trial court was not only against the evidence, but was against the weight of the evidence. The question is not how the respondent originally received, but how he afterwards held the stock. But even by the first agreement, a holding ■other than as collateral was provided for, and this other holding took place. By his own contract with Popper,…
1Opinion of the Court
Philips, C.
Plaintiff, on the 15th day of February, 1876, recovered judgment against the Gravois Railroad Company, a corporation under the laws of this State, for the sum of $5,879.61. On return of execution, nulla bona, plaintiff, in 1877, began proceedings in the circuit court of-St. Louis county, against the defendant, as a stockholder in said company, to realize his said judgment. This proceeding was discontinued by plaintiff. Afterwards, on the 24th day of January, 1880, he began the present proceeding by motion in the circuit court for the same purpose. There is no question made as. to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Chouteau v. AllenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Chapman v. McIlwrathSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- Sparr & Green v. WellmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1847
- Skrainka v. AllenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- Corby v. TracySupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Wilson v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. v. CourtneyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1939
- Berry v. HartzellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- Garetson Lumber Co. v. HinsonOregon Supreme Court · 1914
- Saunders v. Southern Pacific Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1896
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.