Hargadine v. Van Horn

72 Mo. 370
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1880
StatusPublished
Cited by27 cases

This text of 72 Mo. 370 (Hargadine v. Van Horn) 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
Hargadine v. Van Horn, 72 Mo. 370 (Mo. 1880).

Opinions

Napton, J.

This was an action of ejectment. The plaintiff bought under a sale on an attachment, and the only-question upon which our opinion is required is, whether an attachment issued without any affidavit is a nullity, or is merely an error, not affecting a purchaser in a collateral proceeding. This question was discussed and decided in the case of Bray v. McClury, 55 Mo. 128. That case was decided by a divided court, the majority of the judges holding that an affidavit in conformity to the law was essential to give the court jurisdiction. In that case there was an affidavit, but it was defective in not stating that there was any debt due from the defendant. In the present case there was no affidavit at all, that is, the paper described and referred to by the clerk as the one upon which the writ of attachment issued, was not signed by any one, and was, therefore, no affidavit. We are unable to see how any presumption can be entertained against the record that there was some other affidavit than the paper purporting to be one in the record, and as we concur in the opinion then rendered by Judge Adams, the objection is a fatal one to plaintiff’s title, without considering the other points in the case. Judgment is, therefore, reversed.

[371]*371Judges Hough and Henry concur. Sherwood, O. J., and Norton, J., dissent.

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

Related

City of Lake Winnebago v. Sharp
652 S.W.2d 118 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1983)
Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority v. Zitko
386 S.W.2d 69 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1964)
Lubrication Engineers, Inc. v. Parkinson
341 S.W.2d 876 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1961)
In re Central Stamping & Mfg. Co.
77 F. Supp. 331 (E.D. Michigan, 1948)
Davison v. Arne
155 S.W.2d 155 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1941)
Elsea v. Bass
77 S.W.2d 164 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1934)
Feurt v. Lotspeich
273 S.W. 240 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1925)
Miller v. Smith
1 F.2d 292 (Eighth Circuit, 1924)
Shelton v. Smith
257 S.W. 509 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1924)
State Ex Rel. Rabiste v. Southern
254 S.W. 166 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1923)
Robertson v. Robertson
192 S.W. 988 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1917)
First National Bank v. Griffith
182 S.W. 805 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1916)
Maurer v. Phillips
168 S.W. 669 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
Robertson v. Robertson
163 S.W. 266 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
Purcell v. Merrick
158 S.W. 478 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1913)
Ranck v. Merrill
158 S.W. 425 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1913)
Norman v. Pennsylvania Fire Insurance
141 S.W. 618 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1911)
Fitzpatrick v. Stevens
114 Mo. App. 497 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1905)
In re Shannahan
58 A. 1023 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1904)
Turner v. St. John
77 N.W. 340 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1898)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 Mo. 370, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hargadine-v-van-horn-mo-1880.