Grissom v. Allen

Decision Date31 January 1847
Citation10 Mo. 303
CourtMissouri Supreme Court



Allen commenced his action before a justice of the peace against Grissom and one Hezekiah Cotner, on two promissory notes, one executed by Grissom alone, and the other by Grissom and Cotner. The constable returned the summons ““executed according to law.” The transcript of the justice then proceeds to state that “the defendant appeared and acknowledged both notes to be just, and that he was willing for judgment to be given against him the first day. It is therefore considered by the justice here, that the plaintiff have, and recover of, and from the defendants, Washington Grissom and Hezekiah Cotner, the sum of $7 38 for his debt, &c., and also that he have, and recover of, and from the said Washington Grissom, on the other note, the sum of $28 16 for his debt,” & c. On the foregoing judgment, execution issued, directed to the constable of the township, dated the 22nd May, 1845, which was renewed by an indorsement made thereon by the justice on the 26th July, 1845, for sixty days. On the 25th October, 1845, the execution was again renewed by the indorsement of the justice for sixty days. The execution was returned by the constable with the indorsement of two credits, amounting to $29 19, and no property, goods or chattels found out of which to make the balance of the debt and costs. On the 19th March, 1846, a transcript was filed in the office of the clerk of the Circuit Court of Perry county, and an execution was issued from that office on said transcript, on the 19th April, 1846, directed to the sheriff of Perry county, who executed the same by levying it on the real estate of said Grissom. At the May term, 1846, of the Perry Circuit Court, the defendant, Grissom, moved the court to quash the execution, which motion was overruled; thereupon he filed a petition and motion for a prohibitation, which the Circuit Court overruled, and to both decisions of the court he excepted and appealed to this court.

Several points are made in this court by the appollant to reverse the judgment of the Circuit Court, which it is not necessary to notice in detail. It is obvious from the record that the appearance of the defendant, as stated by the justice, was that of Grissom, who was liable to an action on both the notes upon which suit was brought; otherwise it is not probable that the justice would have entered judgment against him on the large...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Bart S. Adams Tire Company, a Corp. v. Fuller
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • April 6, 1920
    ... ... for informalities before the justice, where the defendant had ... appeared and submitted to the judgment. Grissom v ... Allen, 10 Mo. 303. (9) Irregularities of procedure ... occurring prior to judgment will not support a motion to ... quash an execution ... ...
  • Herrington v. Herrington
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 31, 1858 the land. (12 Mo. 169; 14 Mo. 160; 15 Mo. 62; 16 Mo. 225; 17 Mo. 209; 18 Mo. 174, 299; 23 Mo. 579, 588, 168; 24 Mo. 282; 25 Mo. 329; 10 Mo. 303; 5 Mo. 296.) RICHARDSON, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court. Before and at the time the transcript of Beal's judgment was filed in the of......
  • Franse v. Owens
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 31, 1857
    ...that every part of the same is copied from the docket. It is submitted the certificate is good. (Lee's Adm'r v. Lee, 21 Mo. 531; Gipson v. Allen, 10 Mo. 303; R. C. 1845, tit. Justices' Courts, art. 6, sec. 17.) Sheley, for defendants in error. I. In this case the justice's execution was iss......
  • Fry v. Baxter
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • January 31, 1847

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