1 Mo.App. 167 (Mo.App. 1876), Luthy v. Woods

Citation:1 Mo.App. 167
Opinion Judge:GANTT, P. J.
Party Name:JAMES LUTHY, Plaintiff in Error, v. STEPHENSON WOODS et al., Defendants in Error.
Attorney:A. R. Taylor, for plaintiff in error, R. E. Rombauer, for defendants in error,
Case Date:February 14, 1876
Court:Court of Appeals of Missouri
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 167

1 Mo.App. 167 (Mo.App. 1876)

JAMES LUTHY, Plaintiff in Error,

v.

STEPHENSON WOODS et al., Defendants in Error.

Court of Appeals of Missouri, St. Louis.

February 14, 1876

When a party not subject to garnishment is indebted to an insolvent person, a court of equity will, in some cases, aid a creditor of such insolvent in appropriating this credit to the satisfaction of his demand.

ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court.

Reversed and remanded.

A. R. Taylor, for plaintiff in error, cited: Pendleton v. Perkins, 49 Mo. 565; Wag. Stat. 1012; Henderson v. Dickey, 50 Mo. 165; Almett v. Leper, 48 Mo. 321; Murry et al. v. Freeman et al., 44 Mo. 521; Turner v. Adams, 46 Mo. 99; McDowell v. Cochran, 11 Ill. 31; Postlewaite v. Howes, 3 Clarke (Iowa), 366; Hadden v. Spades, 20 Johns. 554; Bigelow v. Congregational Society, 11 Vt. 283; Williams v. Hubbard, Watkins' Ch. 28; Kippen v. Glancy, 2 Blackf. (Ind.) 336; Scott v. McMillan, 1 Litt. (Ky.) 302; Farrar v. Haselden, 9 Rich. (S. C.) Eq. 331; Greenway v. Thomas, 14 Ill. 272; Pope v. Solomon, 36 Ga. 341.

R. E. Rombauer, for defendants in error, cited: Gen. Stat. 1865, ch. 165, sec. 2; Doan v. Holly, 25 Mo. 357-359; Pendleton v. Perkins and City of St. Louis, 49 Mo. 565; Heller v. Stremmel, 52 Mo. 309.

OPINION

GANTT, P. J.

Luthy filed a petition in the St. Louis Circuit Court, in which he stated, first, a legal demand against Woods & Barnes, and asked judgment for it against them; and then proceeded to state that they were utterly insolvent, having no means or property that could be reached by legal process; that the Board of President and Directors of the St. Louis Public Schools was a municipal corporation, and not subject to garnishment; that said corporation was indebted to Woods & Barnes in the sum of $2,700; that by no means could this fund be subjected to the satisfaction of the claims of the creditors of Woods & Barnes except by the equitable interposition of the St. Louis Circuit Court; that the Bremen Savings Bank claimed the said fund; and concluded with a prayer that the court would give him judgment for his debt against Woods & Barnes, and order the Board of President and Directors of the St. Louis Public Schools to pay him, out of the sum they owed to Woods & Barnes, the amount of such judgment, with costs; that the Bremen Savings Bank should show cause against this judgment, if any...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP