Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

107 Mo. App. 208

Smith v. Emerson

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided May 10, 1904

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1904-05-10

— Hon. D. H. Eby, Judge. The bill of exceptions not having been filed in time brings nothing for this court to review except the record proper. Monarch Rubber Co. v. Bunn, 78 Mo. App. 55 ; Union Nat’l Bank v. Barker, 145 Mo. 356; Maddox v. Railroad, 73 Mo. App. 510.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently November 2016

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Aeeirmed and remanded · Decided 1904-05-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

GOODE, J.

¶1This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court sustaining plaintiff’s motion for new trial of the cause of action stated in his petition. The facts need not be given further than to say a counterclaim was filed by the defendant. There was a verdict for the plaintiff, for $1 on his cause of action and for the defendant for $30 on his counterclaim. Subsequently, on motion of the plaintiff, the court set aside the verdict in his favor on the ground that the assessment of nominal damages was against the weight of the evidence. The verdict on the counterclaim was allowed to stand.

¶2*209The record shows defendant’s bill of exceptions was filed long after the time fixed for filing it by tibe court’s order. His contention that a new trial was erroneously granted can not, therefore, be reviewed as it relates to matter of exception.

¶3The order for new trial is affirmed and the cause remanded.

Bland, P. Jand Reyburn, J., concur.
/107/moapp/208 · .json · Public domain