Legal Opinion

Rouggley v. Teichmann

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 19, 1881PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Adams, J.

1Opinion of the CourtBakewell, J.

This is a proceeding, originally in the Probate Court of St. Louis, to enforce a demand against Einstmann as surety on the bond of Dorman as executor of Motier. The demand was allowed in the Probate Court; and, on trial anew on appeal to the Circuit Court, there was judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed.

There was evidence tending to show the following state of facts. On March 6, 1876, the Probate Court made an order on Dorman, who was then executor of Motier, to pay in full a demand which had been already allowed in favor of Pernod. At the time of this order Pernod was dead. Pernod’s…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Smith v. DennySupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
  2. Naylor's Administrator v. MoffattSupreme Court of Missouri · 1859
  3. Hanenkamp's Administrator v. BorgmierSupreme Court of Missouri · 1862

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Orchard v. Wright-Dalton-Bell-Anchor Store Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1910
  2. Estate of Messersmith v. MessersmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1915
  3. O'Howell v. KirkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890

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

Powered by the Exa API