Morrison v. The Steamboat Laura
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The points made against plaintiffs’ claims are understood to be mainly these: . 1. They took a note for about $3,000.19, signed by Nolan & Oaffrey, for part of their account; 2. They took the company’s note for $1,872.74 for another part; and 3. They endorsed and discounted these notes in the Second National Bank.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The points made against plaintiffs’ claims are understood to be mainly these: . 1. They took a note for about $3,000.19, signed by Nolan & Oaffrey, for part of their account; 2. They took the company’s note for $1,872.74 for another part; and 3. They endorsed and discounted these notes in the Second National Bank. It is well settled that the taking of a negotiable note or bill o£ exchange of the owner, master or assignee does not destroy the lien, if the note, &c., matures within the time of the existence of the lien — Harris v. Kensington, 8 Amer. Law…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
The same question of jurisdiction arises in this case that was brought up in the case of Oavender & Rowse v. St. Bt. Fanny Barker, and will be ruled in the same way. It is unnecessary to notice with particularity the point urged by respondent’s counsel, that Scott was not such an agent within the meaning of the “Act concerning boats and vessels” as could bind the boat. The statute gives the lien for supplies and stores furnished by contract with the master, owner, agent or consignee. Scott was the agent of the owner, and the owner contracting by the agent, contracts by himself.
The account was…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Steamboat Charlotte v. HammondSupreme Court of Missouri · 1845
- State v. SmothersSuperior Court of Delaware · 1960
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mountain Electric Co. v. MilesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1899