Crow v. Reliable Jewelry Co.

Decision Date13 February 1906
Citation116 Mo. App. 624,92 S.W. 742
PartiesCROW v. RELIABLE JEWELRY CO. et al.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pemiscot County; Henry C. Riley, Judge.

Suit by Charles A. Crow against the Reliable Jewelry Company and others. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the petition petitioner appeals. Reversed.

C. G. Shepard, for appellant. Faris & Oliver, for respondents.

GOODE, J.

A demurrer having been sustained to the appellant's petition, he stood on his pleading and refused to amend; whereupon the petition, which was in the nature of a bill in equity, was dismissed, and final judgment entered against him. He appealed. According to the averments of the petition, the Reliable Jewelry Company is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Illinois, and J. A. Franklin, the other defendant is the sheriff of Pemiscot county. Heretofore, C. G. Shepard was engaged in the mercantile business in Caruthersville, in that county under the style of C. G. Shepard & Co. The Reliable Jewelry Company sued said Shepard before a justice of the peace for an alleged debt and judgment before the justice went against Shepard and in favor of the jewelry company. Shepard appealed to the circuit court of Pemiscot county and the appellant in this action, Charles A. Crow, signed the appeal bond as his surety. The appealed case came on for trial in the circuit court at the November term, 1903, and on the 28th day of November, a trial was had resulting in a judgment against Crow in favor of the Reliable Jewelry Company. Said company, as plaintiff in the action pending on the account against Shepard, dismissed the action as to him, though he was the sole defendant and the principal on the appeal bond, and had judgment rendered against Crow alone as surety on the bond. Afterwards the Reliable Jewelry Company caused an execution to be issued on the judgment against Crow, and placed the writ in the hands of Franklin, the sheriff, for collection. When the petition in the present cause was filed, Franklin was threatening and attempting to levy the execution on the property in order to collect the judgment. The petition further alleges that before appellant became aware judgment had been rendered against him, the time for taking an appeal had elapsed. The appellant was not present when the cause was dismissed as to Shepard and judgment rendered against appellant, and he knew nothing of the judgment until the sheriff had attempted to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Stulz v. Lentin
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 3, 1927
    ... ...          In the ... case of Crow v. Jewelry Co., 116 Mo.App. 624, 92 ... S.W. 742, Judge GOODE, for this court, had under review a ... ...
  • Wolcott Mfg. Co. v. Cady & Olmstead Jewelry Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 21, 1934
    ...Mich. 110, 128 N. W. 774, 130 N. W. 305, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 778. In the case of Shu-Stiles v. Weinberg's, Inc., supra, Crow v. Jewelry Co., 116 Mo. App. 624, 92 S. W. 742, relied upon by the defendant herein, was Section 16a of the Bankruptcy Act (11 USCA § 34) provides: "The liability of a p......
  • Stulz v. Lentin
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 3, 1927
    ...of Showles v. Freeman, 81 Mo. 540, which case of the Supreme Court is directly in point to that effect. In the case of Crow v. Jewelry Co., 116 Mo. App. 624, 92 S. W. 742, Judge Goode, for this court, had under review a judgment of the circuit court, the case having been appealed from the j......
  • Houck v. Chicago & A. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 13, 1906
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT