Legal Opinion

Alexander v. Relfe

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 1, 1880PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Thayer, J. Being an action by the receiver, in his own name, and for unliquidated damages, respondent cannot recover.— Manlove y>. Burger, 38 Ind. 211; Battle v. Davis, 46 N. C. 255 ; King v. Cutts, 24 Wis. 625 ; Freeman v. Winchester, 10 Smed. & M. 577 ; Yeager v. Wallace, 44 Pa.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Thayer, J. Being an action by the receiver, in his own name, and for unliquidated damages, respondent cannot recover.— Manlove y>. Burger, 38 Ind. 211; Battle v. Davis, 46 N. C. 255 ; King v. Cutts, 24 Wis. 625 ; Freeman v. Winchester, 10 Smed. & M. 577 ; Yeager v. Wallace, 44 Pa. St. 294; Rev. Stats. 1879, sects. 427-431, 744, 745, 3660-3662, ,6043, 6044; Hannah v. Moberly Bank, 67 Mo. 678 ; The State to use, etc., v. Gambs, 68 Mo. 289. Sect. 41 of the insurance law, under which respondent was appointed, did not change the equity practice, nor is it…

1Opinion of the CourtLewis, P. J.

The petition in this cause is as follows : —

“ Plaintiff states that on October 1, 1875, the Life Association of America was and still is a corporation, duly organized under the laws of Missouri, and was and is engaged in the business of insuring the lives of individuals, with its principal office in the city of St. Louis.
“ That prior to October 1, 1875, the St. Louis Life Insurance Company was likewise a corporation, duly organized under the laws of Missoui'i, and engaged in the same business, and was also located in St. Louis. On January 28, 1876, said St. Louis Life Insurance Company was…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hunt v. SimondsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1854
  2. R. H. Battle v. . S.W. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1872
  3. Hannah v. Moberly BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
  4. State ex rel. Fichtenkamm v. GambsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
  5. Relfe v. Commercial InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1878

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Seegers v. Marx & Haas Clothing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1933
  2. Alexander v. WilliamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
  3. Alexander v. RollinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1883

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API