Cullum and Main v. Rice and Hough et al, No. 20125.
| Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
| Writing for the Court | Shain |
| Citation | 162 S.W.2d 342 |
| Parties | EDGAR A. CULLUM AND LUSTER G. MAIN, COPARTNERS, DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME OF CULLUM AND MAIN, APPELLANTS, v. RALPH W. RICE AND CLAUDE B. HOUGH, DEFENDANTS; FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI, A CORPORATION, GARNISHEE, RESPONDENTS. |
| Docket Number | No. 20125. |
| Decision Date | 04 May 1942 |
v.
RALPH W. RICE AND CLAUDE B. HOUGH, DEFENDANTS; FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI, A CORPORATION, GARNISHEE, RESPONDENTS.
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. Albert A. Ridge, Judge.
[162 S.W.2d 343]
AFFIRMED.
Nelson E. Johnson for appellants.
(1) The bank deposit in the hands of the respondent garnishee was owned by the defendant, Ralph W. Rice, and his wife, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship and not as tenants by the entirety. Sec. 7996, R.S. Mo. 1939; Ambruster v. Ambruster, 326 Mo. 51, 68, 31 S.W. (2d) 28, 35; Murphy v. Wolfe, 329 Mo. 545, 552, 45 S.W. (2d) 1079, 1081; Ashbaugh v. Ashbaugh, 253 Mo. 353, 357, 201 S.W. 72, 73; Frost v. Frost, 200 Mo. 474, 481, 98 S.W. 527, 528; Wilson v. Fower, 155 S.W. (2d) 502, 504; Murphy v. Michigan Trust Co., 221 Mich. 243, 190 N.W. 698; Holman v. Mays, 154 Ore. 241, 59 Pac. (2d) 395; In re Halaska's Estate, 307 Ill. App. 183, 30 N.E. (2d) 117; In re Sutor's Estate, 258 N.Y. 104, 106, 179 N.E. 310; Sawyer v. National Shawmut Bank (Mass.), 28 N.E. (2d) 455; 9 C.J.S., Banks and Banking, sec. 286, pp. 595, 596; Melinik v. Meier, 124 S.W. (2d) 594, 597. (2) The interest of defendant, Ralph W. Rice, in the bank deposit in question, being that of a joint tenant, is subject to garnishment. Sawyer v. National Shawmut Bank (Mass.), 28 N.E. (2d) 455, 457; Waggoner v. Bank, 220 Mo. App. 165, 168, 281 S.W. 130, 131; South Central Securities Co. v. Vernon, 227 Mo. App. 486, 494, 54 S.W. (2d) 416, 420; Cook v. McCoy, 118 S.W. (2d) 1043, 1046; Murphy v. Michigan Trust Co., 221 Mich. 243, 245, 190 N.W. 698, 699; Garrison v. First National Bank, 231 Ala. 71, 72, 163 So. 624, 625; In re Sutor's Estate, 258 N.Y. 104, 179 N.E. 310; Lloyd v. Tracy, 53 Mo. App. 175; Swofford Dry Goods Co. v. Diment, 132 Mo. App. 616, 111 S.W. 1196; 23 C.J., sec. 77, p. 338; Musa v. Segelke & Kohlhaus Co., 224 Wis. 432, 272 N.W. 657; Midgley v. Walker, 101 Mich. 583, 60 N.W. 296; Hilborn v. Soale, 44 Cal. App. 115, 185 Pac. 982; Thornburg v. Wiggins, 135 Ind. 178, 34 N.E. 999; Pepin v. Stricklin, 114 Cal. App. 32, 299 Pac. 557; Gwin v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 287 U.S. 224, 228, 77 L. Ed. 270, 274.
Ryland, Stinson, Mag & Thomson, J. Francis O'Sullivan and Lawrence R. Brown for respondent garnishee.
(1) The bank deposit here involved was held by R.W. Rice and Mrs. R.W. Rice as an estate by the entirety. Stifel's Union Brewing Co. v. Saxy et al., 273 Mo. 159, 201 S.W. 67, 71; Ashbaugh v. Ashbaugh (Mo.), 201 S.W. 73; Kingman v. Banks, 251 S.W. 449; South Central Securities Co. v. Vernon, 227 Mo. App. 486, 54 S.W. (2d) 416, 420; Davis v. Knapp, 8 Mo. 657; Peycke Bros. v. Sandstone Co., 195 Mo. App. 417, 419, 191 S.W. 1088; Ahmann v. Kemper, 342 Mo. 944, 119 S.W. (2d) 356; Ryan v. Ford, 151 Mo. App. 689; Lomax v. Cramer, 202 Mo. App. 365; Frost v. Frost, 200 Mo. 474, 98 S.W. 527; Craig v. Bradley, 153 Mo. App. 586; Madden v. Gosztonyi Savings & Trust Co. (Penn.), 200 Atl. 624; Ambruster v. Ambruster, 326 Mo. 51, 31 S.W. (2d) 28; In re Bramberry's Estate, 156 Pa. 628, 22 L.R.A. 594; United States v. Jacobs, 306 U.S. 363, 83 L. Ed. 763; Martin v. Martin, 219 Mo. App. 51; Geist v. Robinson (Penn.), 1 Atl. (2d) 153; Miss. Valley Trust Co. v. Smith, 9 S.W. (2d) 58, 63; Ball v. Merc. Trust Co., 220 Mo. App. 1165, 1172, 297 S.W. 415, 417. (2) Regardless of whether R.W. Rice and Mrs. R.W. Rice were tenants by the entirety or joint tenants, the bank account was not subject to garnishment under an execution on a judgment against the husband alone. 28 C.J. 162; Macks v. Columbia Theatre Co., 86 Mo. App. 224; Schnellmann v. The Southern Commercial & Savings Bank, 123 Mo. App. 188; Hambra Brothers v. Herrell, 200 S.W. 776, 57 A.L.R. 844; Fairfax v. Savings Bank of Baltimore, 199 Atl. 872, 116 A.L.R. 1334; Brown v. First Nat'l Bank, 271 Ill. App. 424; Nochtegal v. Reilley, 130 N.W. 699; Ambruster v. Ambruster, 326 Mo. 51, 31 S.W. (2d) 28; Sheedy v. Second Nat'l Bank, Garnishee, 62 Mo. 17; Bank of Republic v. Republic State Bank, 328 Mo. 848, 42 S.W. (2d) 27; American Sash & Door Co. v. Commerce Trust Co., 332 Mo. 98, 56 S.W. (2d) 1034; School Consolidated Dist. v. Wilson, 345 Mo. 598, 135 S.W. (2d) 349.
SHAIN, P.J.
The issue in this case involves a garnishment proceeding on execution wherein the appellants herein had judgment against the defendant Ralph W. Rice and in favor of plaintiffs in a first count in the sum of $31,189.92, and in a second count in the sum of $2100.
Execution was issued in March, 1940, and the respondent herein was duly served as garnishee and interrogatories were duly filed.
The question involved herein grows out of Interrogative No. 5, as follows:
"At the time of the service of the writ of garnishment upon you, to-wit, on the 7th day of March, 1940, did the defendants, Ralph W. Rice and Claude B....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nelson v. Hotchkiss, No. 61858
...an estate of entirety in husband and wife, who were one person." 186 Mo. at 319, 85 S.W. at 377. Cf. Collum v. Rice, 236 Mo.App. 1113, 162 S.W.2d 342 In Milligan v. Bing, 341 Mo. 648, 108 S.W.2d 108 (1937), title to real property was taken in the name of "Fred E. Bing and Daisy Bing, husban......
-
Ray v. Ray, No. 7835
...evidence of any intention to the contrary, the property is to be presumed to be held by the entirety (Cullum v. Rice, 236 Mo.App. 1113, 162 S.W.2d 342; Glynn v. Glynn, Mo.App., 291 S.W.2d 190, 197; Hanebrink v. Tower Grove Bank & Trust Co., Mo.App., 321 S.W.2d 524; Feltz v. Pavlik, Mo.App.,......
-
Baker's Estate, In re, No. 8038
...Coleman, 241 Mo.App. 600, 240 S.W.2d 188, 190; Craig v. Bradley, 153 Mo.App. 586, 134 S.W. 1081, 1082; Cullum v. Rice, 236 Mo.App. 1113, 162 S.W.2d 342, 5 Schwind v. O'Halloran, 346 Mo. 486, 142 S.W.2d 55, 59; Ray v. Ray, Mo.App., 336 S.W.2d 731, 737; Ambruster v. Ambruster, 326 Mo. 51, 31 ......
-
State Bank of Poplar Bluff v. Coleman, No. 6969
...by the entirety in a bank account. Ambruster v. Ambruster, 326 Mo. 51, 31 S.W.2d 28, 77 A.L.R. 782; Cullum v. Rice, 236 Mo.App. 1113, 162 S.W.2d 342; Ryan v. Ford, 151 Mo.App. 689, 132 S.W. 610; Rezabek v. Rezabek, 196 Mo.App. 673, 192 S.W. And that is so whether the husband or the wife, or......
-
Nelson v. Hotchkiss, No. 61858
...an estate of entirety in husband and wife, who were one person." 186 Mo. at 319, 85 S.W. at 377. Cf. Collum v. Rice, 236 Mo.App. 1113, 162 S.W.2d 342 In Milligan v. Bing, 341 Mo. 648, 108 S.W.2d 108 (1937), title to real property was taken in the name of "Fred E. Bing and Daisy Bing, husban......
-
Ray v. Ray, No. 7835
...evidence of any intention to the contrary, the property is to be presumed to be held by the entirety (Cullum v. Rice, 236 Mo.App. 1113, 162 S.W.2d 342; Glynn v. Glynn, Mo.App., 291 S.W.2d 190, 197; Hanebrink v. Tower Grove Bank & Trust Co., Mo.App., 321 S.W.2d 524; Feltz v. Pavlik, Mo.App.,......
-
Baker's Estate, In re, No. 8038
...Coleman, 241 Mo.App. 600, 240 S.W.2d 188, 190; Craig v. Bradley, 153 Mo.App. 586, 134 S.W. 1081, 1082; Cullum v. Rice, 236 Mo.App. 1113, 162 S.W.2d 342, 5 Schwind v. O'Halloran, 346 Mo. 486, 142 S.W.2d 55, 59; Ray v. Ray, Mo.App., 336 S.W.2d 731, 737; Ambruster v. Ambruster, 326 Mo. 51, 31 ......
-
State Bank of Poplar Bluff v. Coleman, No. 6969
...by the entirety in a bank account. Ambruster v. Ambruster, 326 Mo. 51, 31 S.W.2d 28, 77 A.L.R. 782; Cullum v. Rice, 236 Mo.App. 1113, 162 S.W.2d 342; Ryan v. Ford, 151 Mo.App. 689, 132 S.W. 610; Rezabek v. Rezabek, 196 Mo.App. 673, 192 S.W. And that is so whether the husband or the wife, or......