Robertson v. Shepherd
Decision Date | 26 November 1901 |
Citation | 165 Mo. 360,65 S.W. 573 |
Parties | ROBERTSON v. SHEPHERD et al. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Cass county; W. W. Wood, Judge.
Action by T. O. Robertson against H. C. Shepherd and another. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed.
The petition alleges: That on the 5th day of June, 1891, the plaintiff, together with his wife, executed a promissory note in the sum of $2,000, together with 10 interest coupons for $70 each, all of which coupons have been paid, which note was made payable to Samuel B. Smith; and to secure the payment of it the plaintiff and his wife executed to D. E. Stoner, trustee for Smith, a deed of trust on the following described property in Kansas City, Mo.: "Lot 6 and the south eleven feet of lot 5, block 4, East Side Place." That the deed of trust was recorded at Kansas City on July 14, 1891. That the deed of trust and note were in the hands of H. C. Shepherd, the codefendant, who was threatening to foreclose it. That Stoner, the trustee, refused to act, and that R. S. Stone, the sheriff of Jackson county, had become the successor in the trusteeship, and that said Shepherd would cause R. S. Stone, the sheriff, to sell the property, unless restrained by injunction. The petition then proceeds to set up: That Shepherd also had another note and deed of trust, to wit, a note in the sum of $4,750, upon the same property, which note and deed of trust were given by Wm. McClurg to the plaintiff himself, together with six interest coupons, thereto attached, in the sum of $142.50 each. That, in order to secure payment of the same, McClurg had given a deed of trust on the same property, under date of April 23, 1894, to Jas. H. Harkless, as trustee for T. O. Robertson, and that this deed of trust was recorded in Kansas City, Jackson county. That Harkless had declined and refused to act as trustee, and that R. S. Stone, the sheriff, became the successor in trust for the purpose of foreclosing this deed of trust. That this deed of trust was also at the time in the possession of H. C. Shepherd, who claimed to hold the same by transfer from T. O. Robertson. That Robertson was the owner of the real estate subject to the two above-described deeds of trust, and was the owner at the time the first-described deed of trust was given. That he thereafter conveyed the property to McClurg, subject to the first mortgage; and while the said McClurg remained the owner thereof he (McClurg) executed said second deed of trust to the plaintiff, and after executing it McClurg reconveyed the property to the plaintiff; and that before the execution of the contract hereinafter mentioned Shepherd came into possession of both said deeds of trust and notes. That there were also two tax bills in the sum of $117.13 total, with interest, issued for paving the street in front of the property, which were also in the possession of H. C. Shepherd at the time of making the contract hereinafter mentioned. That afterwards, on or about the 30th of September, 1896, the plaintiff and H. C. Shepherd entered into a contract by which both said deeds of trust, and all notes and coupons secured thereby, and the special tax bills were settled, canceled, and discharged in full, the agreement by which it was settled and discharged being as follows: That thereafter, on the same day, the defendant Shepherd, as part and parcel of said contract, made and signed another contract, or part of said original contract, as follows, to wit: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial- State ex rel. Owens v. Fraser
-
State v. Friend
...Iowa, 322;State v. Wright, 37 Iowa, 522. These decisions have been criticised and conclusions to the contrary reached in Robertson v. Shepherd, 165 Mo. 360, 65 S. W. 573, and Dickenson v. State, 20 Neb. 72, 29 N. W. 184. But see Dennard v. State, 2 Ga. 137; Rupert v. People, 20 Colo. 424, 3......
-
State v. Friend
...Iowa 322; State v. Wright, 37 Iowa 522. These decisions have been criticized and conclusions to the contrary reached in Robertson v. Shepherd, 165 Mo. 360 (65 S.W. 573), and Dickenson v. State, 20 Neb. 72 (29 N.W. But see Dennard v. State, 2 Ga. 137; Rupert v. People, 20 Colo. 424 (38 P. 70......
- Robertson v. Shepherd