Ewing v. Miller
| Decision Date | 30 November 1822 |
| Citation | 1 Mo. 234 |
| Parties | EWING v. MILLER. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
ERROR FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY.
This was an action of debt, brought by Ewing, assignee of one Myers, of a bill single obligatory. Miller plead, the consideration which Myers gave him was fraudulent. To this plea there was a general demurrer. The plea states, also, that Ewing, when he purchased the bond, knew of the fraud. This demurrer was overruled by the Court, and judgment for defendant; to reverse which, is the object of this writ of error. This is a plain case: fraud is pleadable at law to the consideration between the original parties. The statute authorizing the assignment of bonds, expressly saves this defense and every other to the obligor, when he is sued by the assignee. The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed with costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Steinberg v. Merchants' Bank of Kansas City
... ... and to whose rights they have succeeded. Reynolds v ... Third Natl. Bank, 225 S.W. 901; Hollander v ... Heaslip, 222 F. 808; Ewing v. Miller, 1 Mo ... 234; Sumrall v. Sun Mutual Ins. Co., 40 Mo. 27; ... Higgins v. Cartwright, 25 Mo.App. 609; United ... Shoe Machinery ... ...
-
Steinberg v. Merchants Bank of Kansas City
...they stand and to whose rights they have succeeded. Reynolds v. Third Natl. Bank, 225 S.W. 901; Hollander v. Heaslip, 222 Fed. 808; Ewing v. Miller, 1 Mo. 234; Sumrall v. Sun Mutual Ins. Co., 40 Mo. 27; Higgins v. Cartwright, 25 Mo. App. 609; United Shoe Machinery Co. v. Ramlose, 210 Mo. 63......
- Robinson v. Johnson