Renshaw v. Wills
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. ‘ I. That the sheriff is trustee of this fund; that he held the note taken for the purchase money of the land, subject to the order of the court; that having been ordered to take a note for the deferred.payment, he has no other authority than to collect the money and pay it over, under the order of the court: he could not sell the note. II.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. ‘ I. That the sheriff is trustee of this fund; that he held the note taken for the purchase money of the land, subject to the order of the court; that having been ordered to take a note for the deferred.payment, he has no other authority than to collect the money and pay it over, under the order of the court: he could not sell the note. II. That if the plaintiff discounted the note with a know ledge- of the fact that the sheriff held it in the capacity of trustee, he becomes a party to the illegal act of the sheriff, and acquires no title to the…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
Plaintiff instituted suit against defendant on a negotiable promissory note made by defendant, payable to the order of James Oastello, sheriff, for the sum of eighteen hundred and fifty-sis dollars twenty-five cents, due two years after date, and endorsed by Oastello before maturity to plaintiff.
The defendant in her answer alleged, that, in a certain proceeding in partition, wherein she was one of the parties, by the decree of the court, the said James Oastello, then sheriff of St. Louis county, was ordered, adjudged and required to sell the real estate in the partition suit mentioned and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Swift v. TysonSupreme Court of the United States · 1842
- Powell v. MorrisonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1864
- Ranney v. BrooksSupreme Court of Missouri · 1854
3Cited by2 opinions
- Eyerman v. Second National BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1883
- Mason v. Bank of CommerceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1884