Hull v. Sherwood

59 Mo. 172
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedFebruary 15, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 59 Mo. 172 (Hull v. Sherwood) 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
Hull v. Sherwood, 59 Mo. 172 (Mo. 1875).

Opinion

Sherwood, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This ease comes up here on appeal from the refusal of the court below to quash an execution issued at the instance and to the use of one Albin, to whom (he being the surety of Ayers, who was insolvent, and the co-surety of Sherwood the defendant) was assigned, upon its being paid in full, a judgment recovered by the plaintiff, Hull, against Ayres, Albin and Sherwood.

The motion was filed by the defendant , and ought to have prevailed regardless of the intention with which the assignment of the judgment to the co-surety was procured. Hammatt vs. Wyman, 9 Mass., 138; Brackett vs. Winslow, 17 Id., 154; Harbeck vs. Vanderbilt, 20 N. Y., 395, fully support this view; and our.own decisions, so far as they go, do not militate against it.

This proceeding was a purely legal one, conducted in a summary manner, without the formalities of pleading, in which it was. impossible to invoke the equitable doctrines of substitution or subrogation.

After Hull had received payment of his debt he could not have successfully sued out an execution; and for the same reason, it was beyond his power.to authorize any one else to do so, under any pretext, in his name.

As to what would be the right of Albin in another form of procedure, it would be dehors this record to determine.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded;

all the other judges concur. .

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

Related

First National Bank v. Barrett
94 S.W.2d 928 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1936)
Phelps v. Scott
30 S.W.2d 71 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1930)
R. W. Wallace & Sons Manufacturing Co. v. Hagood Manufacturing Co.
189 S.W. 32 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1916)
Johnson v. Sherrodd
125 S.W. 212 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
Burrus v. Cook
114 S.W. 1065 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1908)
Reynolds v. Schade
109 S.W. 629 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
Burrus v. Cook
93 S.W. 888 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1906)
Guerney v. Moore
32 S.W. 1132 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1895)
Bank on Warren County v. Kemble
61 Mo. App. 215 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1895)
Johnson ex rel. Hemminghaus v. Greve
60 Mo. App. 170 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1895)
Harper v. Rosenberger
56 Mo. App. 388 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1894)
Ferguson's Administrator v. Carson's Administrator
86 Mo. 673 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1885)
Webster v. Switzer
15 Mo. App. 346 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1884)
Riggs v. Goodrich
74 Mo. 108 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1881)
Holden v. Vaughan
64 Mo. 588 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1877)
Phillips v. Evans
64 Mo. 17 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1876)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 Mo. 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hull-v-sherwood-mo-1875.