Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Crismon, 9551
| Citation | 516 S.W.2d 57 |
| Decision Date | 13 November 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 9551,9551 |
| Parties | FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, a corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Larry G. CRISMON, Defendant, Edwin M. McCabe, Intervenor-Respondent. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
David L. Colson, Colson & Wagner, Farmington, for plaintiff-appellant.
No appearance for defendant.
L. Michael Lorch, Piedmont, for intervenor-respondent.
Plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (hereinafter F.D.I.C.) instituted this replevin suit against Larry G. Crismon and W. W. Harris, seeking possession of a Caterpillar tractor and damages for its taking and detention. Intervening plaintiff Edwin M. McCabe sought possession of the tractor and damages from F.D.I.C.
W. W. Harris disclaimed any interest in the tractor and was dismissed from the suit by F.D.I.C. Answer was filed on behalf of Larry G. Crismon to F.D.I.C.'s petition but neither he nor his attorney appeared at the trial and a motion for directed verdict in F.D.I.C.'s favor was sustained and returned against defendant Crismon for possession of the tractor. The directed verdict was silent as to damages.
The intervening petition of Edwin M. McCabe was denied by F.D.I.C. and the jury returned a verdict in McCabe's favor for possession of the tractor but declined to assess any damages in his favor. F.D.I.C. has appealed.
The record entry of the 'Judgment Entry' is as follows:
'Thereafter, evidence is submitted by the Intervening Plaintiff, Edwin McCabe, and the jury having returned the following verdict:
'We, the jury, find the Caterpiller tractor to be the property of intervening plaintiff, Edwin McCabe, and that he, Edwin McCabe, was entitled to the possession thereof on the 23rd day of February, 1971.'
'It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged and decreed that Intervening Plaintiff have judgment against Plaintiff, that Plaintiff return the said caterpillar tractor to the Intervening Plaintiff, Edwin McCabe, and have execution therefor; and further, the costs of this proceeding are hereby assessed against the Plaintiff, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
'The Court further orders that the bond filed herein by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Maryland...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Washburn
...327(3) (Mo.1951); Hanover Fire Ins. Co. v. Commercial Standard Ins. Co., 215 S.W.2d 444, 445(2) (Mo.1948); Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Crismon, 516 S.W.2d 57, 58(2) (Mo.App.1974). In the case at bar, it is clear that Fred G. Jones has been at all times since institution of suit, and still......
-
Lawrence v. Steadley Co., Inc., 10649
...v. Miller, 461 S.W.2d 876, 878-879 (Mo.1970); Cochran v. DeShazo, 538 S.W.2d 598, 600(4) (Mo.App.1976); Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Crismon, 516 S.W.2d 57, 58(2) (Mo.App.1974).3 Citizens Ins. Co. of New Jersey v. Kansas City Commercial Cartage, Inc., 543 S.W.2d 532, 533(1) (Mo.App.1976); ......
-
Baumstark v. Jordan
...it is the duty of the appellate court to order dismissal sua sponte if the judgment is not final, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Crismon, 516 S.W.2d 57, 58 (Mo.App.1974) and Coonis v. Rogers, 413 S.W.2d 310, 313 (Mo.App.1967). The general rule of finality of judgment requires that......
-
Seiser, Matter of, 38216
...final and dispose of all the issues in the cause. Spires v. Edgar, 513 S.W.2d 372, 373 (Mo.banc 1974); Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Crismon, 516 S.W.2d 57, 58 (Mo.App.1974); In re Estate of Ritter, 510 S.W.2d 188, 189 The order of the circuit court appealed from does not finally......