How v. Dorscheimer
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Greene Court of Common Pleas. I. The court below ought to have set aside the judgment because the statement did not set out concisely the facts out of which the debt arose, on which the note was given, and because the statement as to the account is insufficient, giving no particulars nor items, and is a mere evasion of the statute-under which it was made.
Read the full summary
Error to Greene Court of Common Pleas. I. The court below ought to have set aside the judgment because the statement did not set out concisely the facts out of which the debt arose, on which the note was given, and because the statement as to the account is insufficient, giving no particulars nor items, and is a mere evasion of the statute-under which it was made. (R. C. 1855, p. .1282, § 22.) A statement that the account is for “ goods and merchandise,” and that the debt is “ by note dated January 11,1859, for the sum of two hundred and six dollars and twenty-five cents, payable four months…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, Judge
A confession of judgment, upon a statement which merely sets out a promissory note as the consideration of the indebtedness, is subject to be set aside at the instance of other judgment creditors of the judgment debtor. But the judgment confessed is not a nullity; it is good and valid between the parties, and the party applying to have it vacated must show that his rights are affected by letting it stand. (Bryan v. Miller, 28 Mo. 32; Gilman v. Hovey & Buchanan, 26 Mo. 288.)
The confession of judgment in this case was made by a partnership firm, Brown & Warren. The application to set it aside…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bryan v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1859
- Gilman v. HoveySupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
3Cited by3 opinions
- H. S. Burr & Co. v. Frank Mathers & Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1892
- Southern Bank of Missouri v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- McHenry v. ShephardMissouri Court of Appeals · 1876