Roberts v. Jeffries

Citation80 Mo. 115
PartiesROBERTS v. JEFFRIES et al.; INGE'S ADMINISTRATOR, Appellant.
Decision Date31 October 1883
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri

Appeal from Franklin Circuit Court.--HON. A. J. SEAY, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

T. A. Lowe for appellant.

Crews & Booth and Thos. B. Crews for respondent.

HENRY, J.

This is a suit on a note executed by the defendants Jeffries and J. N. Inge, dated 13th day of October, 1869, for $2,640, payable to plaintiff, twelve months after its date.

After the institution of the suit in the Franklin circuit court, the defendant Inge died, and Webb, as administrator of his estate, filed his separate answer to the petition, in which he admitted the execution of the note by his intestate, but alleged that Charles R. Jeffries was the principal in the note, and that Inge and C. S. Jeffries signed it as sureties, and that Inge did so at the special instance of the other payors, who agreed with him that they would hold him harmless, and that if C. R. Jeffries failed to pay the note at maturity, C. S. Jeffries would pay it; that said C. R. Jeffries then owned about 300 acres of land in Franklin county, worth more than double the amount of the note; that afterward, on the 15th day of November, 1871, said C. R. and C. S. Jeffries, contriving to obtain an advantage over said Inge and to hold said C. S. harmless, contrived and confederated together to place all of C. R.'s real estate in said county at the disposal and control of C. S., and accordingly said C. R. executed and delivered to one E. H. Jeffries a deed of trust, conveying all of his most valuable lands in Franklin county, to secure a note for $200, executed by C. R. and payable to C. S. Jeffries, dated December 5th, 1868, and to secure said C. S. Jeffries against his liability on the note in suit; that immediately after the execution of said deed of trust the beneficiary, C. S. Jeffries, took possession of part of the land, worth $250 per annum, and has ever since continued in possession; that the plaintiff had notice of all of said facts and acquiesced in and sanctioned the same, and has extended the time of payment of said note without the consent of Inge, and prays that E. H. Jeffries be brought into court and required to execute said deed of trust, and to restrain the collection of any judgment that plaintiff may obtain in this action against defendant Webb, as administrator, and all process and pleading against the property of the estate of Inge. The court sustained a demurrer to the answer of Inge, and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • American Waterworks & Guarantee Co. v. Home Water Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • March 26, 1902
    ......183.] . N.C. 64; Miller v. White, 25 S.C. 235; Armstrong. v. Poole, 30 W.Va. 266, 5 S.E. 257; Hardy v. Overman, 36 Ind. 549; Roberts v. Jeffries, 80. Mo. 115; Allen v. Woodard, 125 Mass, 400, 28 Am.Rep. 250; Bank v. Wood, 71 N.Y. 405, 27 Am.Rep. 66. The. Arkansaw Water ......
  • School Dist. of St. Joseph v. Security Bank of St. Joseph
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 7, 1930
    ...... sureties on the bond. Carr v. Curd, 34 Mo. 513;. Burge v. Duden, 195 Mo.App. 8; Roberts v. Jeffries, 80 Mo. 115. (4) Exhibits A and B on which suit. was brought. McLeary v. Babcock, 169 Ind. 228. (5). The purpose of the giving of ......
  • School District v. Security Bank
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 7, 1930
    ...be a fact, is not available as a defense to the sureties on the bond. Carr v. Curd, 34 Mo. 513; Burge v. Duden, 195 Mo. App. 8; Roberts v. Jeffries, 80 Mo. 115. (4) Exhibits A and B on which suit was brought. McLeary v. Babcock, 169 Ind. 228. (5) The purpose of the giving of the depositary ......

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