Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

845 S.W.2d 642

Campbell v. Sutton

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 22, 1992

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1992-12-22

Relies on Cooper v. General Standard, Inc. · Wilmering v. Whelan Security Co. · Verdin ex rel. Verdin v. Agnew

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1992-12-22

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 2016

21 state decisions

100199220002010decided

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 →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Appellant (Debtor) appeals the jury award of $9,000 on Respondent’s (Creditor) action to recover an amount due and owing on a promissory note. Debtor has elected to handle his own appeal to his detriment. His brief does not comply with Rule 84.04 in most respects. Debtor alleges four points of error: (1) failure of Creditor to make a submissible case; (2) insufficient evidence to support the jury instructions; (3) improper introduction of evidence; and (4) failure to instruct on comparative fault. We are unable to review the record for these errors, because Debtor did not file a transcript of the trial proceedings showing wherein and how there was reversible error. Wilmering v. Whelan Security Co., 800 S.W.2d 806, 806[1] (Mo.App.1990); Verdin v. Agnew, 715 S.W.2d 544, 546[1] (Mo.App.1986); Cooper v. General Standard, Inc., 674 S.W.2d 117, 122[6] (Mo.App.1984). It is the duty of Debtor to furnish the transcript and in its absence there is nothing for us to review. Cooper, 674 S.W.2d at 122[6].

¶2Appeal dismissed.

/845/sw2d/642 · .json · Public domain