Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Citation
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Parent Document
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1902-02-18
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8296427/leet-v-gratz/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (42)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
- Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Full Text
535 charsi “This is an anomalous case; none like it has been produced, and to sustain the position assumed by the circuit judge, would, as we think, be to engraft a new principle upon the law, unwarranted by authority. Where the vendee has been sued, he may notify his vendor to appear and defend the suit, and provision is made by law for making him defendant; but there is no principle by which he can be substituted as a plaintiff in the action of ejectment, and we therefore can think of no reason for notifying him in such case to appear.”