Legal Opinion

Fleming v. Clark

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided May 10, 1886PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from Holt Circuit Court, Hon. H. S. Kelley,Judge. Statement of case by the court. This is an action for the recovery of the possession, of personal property. The action was instituted by H. H. Simpson and James F. Bridgeman; afterward Simpson died and his administrator Fleming was made a-party plaintiff. As to some of the facts there was a contention between the parties. Other facts were admitted.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Holt Circuit Court, Hon. H. S. Kelley,Judge. Statement of case by the court. This is an action for the recovery of the possession, of personal property. The action was instituted by H. H. Simpson and James F. Bridgeman; afterward Simpson died and his administrator Fleming was made a-party plaintiff. As to some of the facts there was a contention between the parties. Other facts were admitted. Determining the contention as to all the disputed facts in favor of the plaintiffs, the facts of the case may be stated as follows: The defendant was constable of Benton township, Holt…

1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.

The defendant denied many of the facts in the foregoing statement, but the plaintiffs controverted none of them. The plaintiffs made their right to recover depend upon the facts as stated.

The question in the case is: Under the facts were the plaintiffs, at the time of the institution of this action, entitled tó the immediate and exclusive possession of the property as against the defendant ?

The possession of the property by the sheriff placed it in the custody of the law, and it was not, while such possession continued, subject to levy by the defendant. Drake on Attachment, sects. 251, 267;…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bates County National Bank v. OwenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
  2. Gartside v. NixonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1868
  3. Thompson v. MarshMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
  4. Labeaume ex rel. Chouteau v. SweeneySupreme Court of Missouri · 1855

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. D. C. Wise Coal Co. v. Columbia Zinc & Lead Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911
  2. Hudson v. LamarMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
  3. State Ex Rel. v. Weinberg and Am. Sur. Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API