Howell, Jewett & Co. v. Caryl & Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
.Appeal from, the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. John W. Henky, Judge. (1) The court erred in admitting in evidence tlie •copy of the chattel mortgage from Lund to plaintiffs, :for the reason that it was not certified according to act of congress, nor was it “a record or an exemplification of an office book/’ witkin tbe meaning of section 4844, Revised Statutes, 1889; nor was • any foundation laid for tbe introduction of secondary evidence.
Read the full summary
.Appeal from, the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. John W. Henky, Judge. (1) The court erred in admitting in evidence tlie •copy of the chattel mortgage from Lund to plaintiffs, :for the reason that it was not certified according to act of congress, nor was it “a record or an exemplification of an office book/’ witkin tbe meaning of section 4844, Revised Statutes, 1889; nor was • any foundation laid for tbe introduction of secondary evidence. R. S.. 1889, sec. 4844; State v. Pag els, 92 Mo. 300. Tbe court-limited tbe effect of tbe copy to tbe date and fact of' filing. But tbe copy bas no…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
— This is an action of trespass de bonis asportatis.
It appears from the evidence that one Martin Lund was a dealer in lumber and building material at Burlingame, Osage county, Kansas, and was indebted to the plaintiffs and Caryl & Co. (a firm composed of defendant and Barker), who were wholesale lumber dealers respectively at Chicago and Kansas City. It appears further that Lund was indebted to the former in the sum of $1,800, and to the latter in the sum of $158.95, evidenced by a promissory note. The undisputed evidence was that the plaintiffs were put in possession by Lund of his entire…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- State v. PagelsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Kerr v. . MountNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Conrad v. FisherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Hughes v. MenefeeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
- Smith v. ShawNew York Supreme Court · 1815
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rodriguez v. Suzuki Motor Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1999
- Pourney v. SeabaughMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980
- Norman v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of AmericaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
- Florsheim & Co. v. FryMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905