Woods v. State ex rel. Robt
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
| Writing for the Court | McBRIDE |
| Citation | 10 Mo. 698 |
| Parties | ISAAC WOODS ET AL. v. THE STATE OF MISSOURI, TO THE USE OF ROBT. RAINEY. |
| Decision Date | 31 July 1847 |
10 Mo. 698
ISAAC WOODS ET AL.
v.
THE STATE OF MISSOURI, TO THE USE OF ROBT. RAINEY.
Supreme Court of Missouri.
July Term, 1847.
HENDRICK, for Appellant. 1. The bond sued on, is not such a bond as the statute authorizes suit in the name of the State to the use of Robt. Rainey, by his curator, to be brought on. The bond not being a statutory bond, there is a material distinction between the condition of the bond sued on, and that of the statutory bond, to be given by administrators. 2. The breach found to be true by the jury, is not sufficiently specific, because it does not specify which settlement or settlements, required to be made by the administrator he failed to make; nor does it charge, that the administrator totally failed to settle his accounts. The breach ought to have charged, either a total failure to settle, or specifically charge, which of his settlements required by law to be made, he failed to make. Rev. Stat. p. 65, act prescribing forms of Administrators Bonds; Rev. Stat. § 5, p. 782, act to regulate Actions on Penal Bonds.
EDWARDS, for Appellee. 1. The defendants having failed to plead, according to the leave given by the conrt, and having failed to file any plea in answer to said action, the plaintiff was entitled to judgment by default. Rev. Code 1845, p. 814, § 36. 2. The declaration being substantially good, could only be reached by special demurrer. The motion in arrest, will not reach an objection merely technical, after judgment by default. 3. The judgment cannot be arrested, for anything that would be cured by verdict. See 1 Saund. 228, n. (1); 1 Chitty's Pl. 370; 9 Mo. R. 778. 4. The bond sued on is good. It is true that it contains more than is required by the statute to be recited in the bond of an administrator. The law allows and authorizes a variance from the statute, in bonds given by administrators with the will annexed. See Rev. Code 1835, p. 43, § 15, 5. The bond is substantially good. Rev. Code 1845, p. 43, § 15. See also the argument of this court, Jones v. The State of Missouri, 7 Mo. R. 81; Grant v. Brotherton, 7 Mo. R. 458; The State, &c. v. Porter, 9 Mo. 356; Henry et al. v. The State, &c., 9 Mo. R. 778.
McBRIDE, J.
William Townsend, curator of Robert Rainey, brought an action of debt in the Greene Circuit Court, in the name of the State of Missouri, to his use, against Isaac Woods, administrator, with the will annexed of George R. Rainey, deceased, and Henry and Jesse Hickman, as his
[10 Mo. 699]
securities, on his official bond, to recover the distributive share of the said Robert, who is one of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Wipke, No. 36793.
...in it that are not authoried by the statue. 11 C.J.S. 420; Rubelman Hardware Co. v. Greve, 18 Mo. App. 6; Woods v. State of Missouri, 10 Mo. 698. (5) The legislative intent is clear that entire penal sum of the statutory liquor bonds of retail liquor dealers is to be forfeited to the State ......
-
State ex rel. v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., No. 19530.
...Harry Wipke and The Reserve Mutual Casualty Co., No. 36793, Sept. Term, Mo. S. Ct., 1939 (Not yet reported); Woods v. State ex rel. Ramey, 10 Mo. 698; United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. The Iowa Telephone Co., 174 Iowa, 476, 156 N.W. 727; Schisel v. Marvill, 198 Iowa, 725, 197 N.W. 66......
-
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Iowa Telephone Co., 30608
...116, 124; 4 Meyer's Federal Decisions, Sec. 234; Yost v. Ramey, 103 Va. 117, 48 S.E. 862; State v. Findley, 10 Ohio 51; Woods v. State, 10 Mo. 698; Vroom v. Executors of Smith, 14 N.J.L. 479; United States v. Hodson, 77 U.S. 395, 10 Wall. 395, 19 L.Ed. 937; United States v. Mora, 97 U.S. 41......
-
Fairmont Cement Stone Mfg. Co. v. Davison
...by the statute may be rejected as surplusage, and the bond will be regarded as a statutory bond, and sued upon as such.’ Woods v. State, 10 Mo. 698. This rule has been accepted by the courts apparently without dissent.' Note appended to case of Probate Court of Central Falls v. Adams, 8 Ann......
-
State v. Wipke, No. 36793.
...in it that are not authoried by the statue. 11 C.J.S. 420; Rubelman Hardware Co. v. Greve, 18 Mo. App. 6; Woods v. State of Missouri, 10 Mo. 698. (5) The legislative intent is clear that entire penal sum of the statutory liquor bonds of retail liquor dealers is to be forfeited to the State ......
-
State ex rel. v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., No. 19530.
...Harry Wipke and The Reserve Mutual Casualty Co., No. 36793, Sept. Term, Mo. S. Ct., 1939 (Not yet reported); Woods v. State ex rel. Ramey, 10 Mo. 698; United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. The Iowa Telephone Co., 174 Iowa, 476, 156 N.W. 727; Schisel v. Marvill, 198 Iowa, 725, 197 N.W. 66......
-
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Iowa Telephone Co., 30608
...116, 124; 4 Meyer's Federal Decisions, Sec. 234; Yost v. Ramey, 103 Va. 117, 48 S.E. 862; State v. Findley, 10 Ohio 51; Woods v. State, 10 Mo. 698; Vroom v. Executors of Smith, 14 N.J.L. 479; United States v. Hodson, 77 U.S. 395, 10 Wall. 395, 19 L.Ed. 937; United States v. Mora, 97 U.S. 41......
-
Fairmont Cement Stone Mfg. Co. v. Davison
...by the statute may be rejected as surplusage, and the bond will be regarded as a statutory bond, and sued upon as such.’ Woods v. State, 10 Mo. 698. This rule has been accepted by the courts apparently without dissent.' Note appended to case of Probate Court of Central Falls v. Adams, 8 Ann......