Langsdorf v. Field

36 Mo. 440
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1865
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 36 Mo. 440 (Langsdorf v. Field) 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
Langsdorf v. Field, 36 Mo. 440 (Mo. 1865).

Opinion

Wagner, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

We see no error in the ruling of the court excluding the declaration of Meirand; for aught that appears, he was a competent witness, and if his evidence was desired he should have been called on to testify. There was no evidence offered on behalf of the interpleaders to show a positive sale and delivery of the goods, though there was some evidence from which the jury might have deduced and inferred such sale, &c. The act of the parties in ordering the sheriff to levy on the goods under the judgment they had obtained against the defendant in the attachment, was a circumstance going strongly to show that there was no sale or delivery of the goods. The sale and the levy were two inconsistent acts. For a party to acquire an absolute title to goods by purchase, and the very next day have them levied upon by execution in his favor as the property of his vendor, is an absurdity.

The last instructions offered by appellants, and refused by the court, should have been given.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Judge Holmes concurs; Judge Lovelace absent.

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

Related

Whimster v. Holmes
164 S.W. 236 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
Anchor Milling Co. v. Walsh
20 Mo. App. 107 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1885)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 Mo. 440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/langsdorf-v-field-mo-1865.