Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

96 Mo. 185

Schultz v. Tatum

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1888

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1888-10-15

<p>Injunction: collection of notes : restraining enforcement of DEED OF TRUST: APPELLATE JURISDICTION. The Supreme Court has no appellate jurisdiction in a suit to enjoin the collection of promissory notes and restrain the enforcement of a deed of trust securing the same, where the amount in dispute does not exceed twenty-five hundred dollars; title to real estate is not involved in the determination of the cause.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1918

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Remanded · Decided 1888-10-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Brace, J.

¶1In this suit the plaintiffs seek to perpetually enjoin the collection of two promisory notes executed by the plaintiff Schultz and delivered to one Fisher, and to restrain the enforcement of a deed of trust upon certain real estate given to secure the payment of these, and other notes which have been paid, upon the ground that the conditions upon which these notes were to become operative and binding upon the plaintiff, and upon which they were to be delivered to *186tbe defendant have not been, and cannot be performed by him. The amount in dispute does not exceed twenty-five hundred dollars, title to real estate is not involved in the determination of the case, nor any question that would confer appellate jurisdiction thereof upon the supreme court. The case being within the final appellate jurisdiction of the St. Louis court of appeals, it is remanded to that court, from which it seems to have been inadvertently transferred to this.

All concur except Eay, J., absent.
/96/mo/185 · .json · Public domain