Forrey v. Holmes

65 Mo. App. 114, 1896 Mo. App. LEXIS 157
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 3, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 65 Mo. App. 114 (Forrey v. Holmes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Forrey v. Holmes, 65 Mo. App. 114, 1896 Mo. App. LEXIS 157 (Mo. Ct. App. 1896).

Opinion

Ellison, J.

This action is to enforce a special tax bill, issued under the charter of Kansas City. It appears that M. M. Holmes was the owner of property against which the bill was issued, and that defendant Hicks was the beneficiary in a deed of trust on said property. That the charter of Kansas City prescribes a limitation period of two years in which suits to enforce such tax bills must be brought. That the present suit was instituted against Holmes and others within the two years, but defendant Hicks was not then a party defendant. That he was made a party defendant by amendment after the limitation period had expired. Judgment was rendered against defendants by the justice of the peace, and Hicks appealed to the circuit court, where judgment was again rendered, enforcing the tax bill against the interest of Hicks and he appealed to this court.

Under the construction of the charter which has been given by the courts, we must hold that the suit was not commenced against Hicks within the two years and that, therefore, it was. improper to render the judgment against him or his interest in the property. Jaicks v. Sullivan, 128 Mo. 177; Smith v. Barrett, 41 Mo. App. 460.

The judgment will, therefore, be reversed.

All concur.

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

Related

Peters v. Dona
54 P.2d 817 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1936)
Granite Bituminous Paving Co. v. Park View Realty & Improvement Co.
196 S.W. 1142 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1917)
Rockwell v. City of Junction City
141 P. 299 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1914)
Hiller v. Schulte
167 S.W. 461 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1913)
Granite Bituminous Paving Co. v. Parkview Realty & Improvement Co.
151 S.W. 479 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1912)
Parker-Washington Co. v. Kemper Investment Co.
128 S.W. 271 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
Badger Lumber Co. v. Staley
125 S.W. 779 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 Mo. App. 114, 1896 Mo. App. LEXIS 157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forrey-v-holmes-moctapp-1896.