Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

62 Mo. 403

Fowler & Wild v. Williams

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided May 15, 1876

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1876-05-15

I. The judgment is irregular, and the motion in arrest should have been sustained. (Revis vs. Lamme & Bro., 2 Mo., ' 207; Rohrbough & Co. vs. Reed Bros., 57 Mo., 293.) I. The defendant could only have taken advantage of the error by plea in abatement. (Hawley vs. Blanton, 1 Mo., 49 ; Boise vs. Langham, 1 Mo., 572 ; Thompson vs. Elliot, 5 Mo., 118.)

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1876-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently July 2012

16 state decisions

50187618801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Wagner, Judge,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2Plaintiffs, by their firm name, commenced an action against the defendant before a justice of the peace.

¶3In the justice’s court the parties appeared, and after the evidence was heard, a verdict was rendered for the defendant. Plaintiffs then paid the costs and took an appeal to the circuit court. In the latter court both parties appeared, and by mutual consent and agreement the case was referred. The referee took the testimony and reported in favor of the plaintiffs. No exceptions were taken to the report, and it was confirmed and judgment rendered thereon. Defendant then moved in arrest of judgment, on the sole ground that the plaintiff’s individual names were not set. out. ■

¶4The court overruled the motion in arrest, and that is the only point disclosed by the record. An action, to be pi*operly brought, should be commenced in the chiistian and surnames of the parties. But where the declaration is in the name of a firm, if advantage is sought to be taken of the defect, it should be done by a suitable motion before the tidal is closed, so as to give the parties an opportunity to amend. If no such motion is made, and the cause proceeds to judgment, the judgment will not be void, but will be good after verdict.

¶5Whether a judgment could be sustained against a firm, where the individual names wore not inserted in the petition, is another and very different question, which we are not called xxpon to consider*.

¶6* Parties ought not to be encouraged in taking their chances in legal proceedings, and in indncing the court and the opposite party to believe that they have waived mere irx*egularities, and then, when they are defeated, rely upon them as a last resort.

¶7The judgment should be affirmed. All .the other judgeB concur, except Judge Tories, who is absent.

/62/mo/403 · .json · Public domain