Davis v. Imboden

Supreme Court of Missouri

Davis v. Imboden

10 Mo. 340

DecidedJuly 15, 1846

StatusPublished

This text of 10 Mo. 340 (Davis v. Imboden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Davis v. Imboden, 10 Mo. 340 (Mo. 1846).

Pincite

Opinion

Scott, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Imboden, assignee, sued Hunter and others upon a bond for the payment of money. The plea was non est factum. The defence set up was, that the bond was not assigned by the legal owner of it to Imboden.

The defence was inadmissible, under the plea of non est factum; that plea admitted the truth of all the allegations contained in the declaration, except the execution of the instrument sued on. Ragland vs. Ragland, 5 Mo. R. 54.

The other Judges concurring, the judgment of the Court below will be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Scott, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Imboden, assignee, sued Hunter and others upon a bond for the payment of money. The plea was non est factum. The defence set up was, that the bond was not assigned by the legal owner of it to Imboden.

The defence was inadmissible, under the plea of non est factum; that plea admitted the truth of all the allegations contained in the declaration, except the execution of the instrument sued on. Ragland vs. Ragland, 5 Mo. R. 54.

The other Judges concurring, the judgment of the Court below will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 Mo. 340, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-imboden-mo-1846.