Iler v. Rieger & Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. O. L. Dobson, Judge. (1) The theory of the garnishment proceeding is that it amounts to no more than a substitution of the plaintiff for the defendant debtor in the enforcement of any liability against the garnishee, and for this reason the garnishing creditor can not recover unless the principal defendant could in an action by him- against the garnishee. Schuler v. Israel, 120 U. S. 506; Firebaugh v. Stone, 36 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. O. L. Dobson, Judge. (1) The theory of the garnishment proceeding is that it amounts to no more than a substitution of the plaintiff for the defendant debtor in the enforcement of any liability against the garnishee, and for this reason the garnishing creditor can not recover unless the principal defendant could in an action by him- against the garnishee. Schuler v. Israel, 120 U. S. 506; Firebaugh v. Stone, 36 Mo. Ill; McPherson v. B. B., 66 Mo. 103; Water Co. v. Earkness, 49 Mo. App. 357; Tent Co. v. Bank, 57 Mo. App. 19. (2) The insolvency or…
1Opinion
*69ON MOTION BOB BEHEAEING.
-: attachment: debt not due. Garnishee’s counsel, in their motion for rehearing, urge that we have overlooked the admitted fact that the defendants at the date of garnishment were guilty of a fraudulent disposition of their property, and that because of such fraud the bank had then a right to sue, as provided by section 522 of the attachment law. Having then a right to bring attachment against defendant, it is contended that the right of set-off existed.
The position is not tenable. To entitle the gainishee to set-off, its claim against defendants must then have been…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Duryee v. TurnerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Grier v. FoxMissouri Court of Appeals · 1877
- Houser v. AnderschMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895