Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

88 Mo. App. 372

Davis v. Blair

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 9, 1901

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1901-04-09

— Hon. Eclwin B. McKee, Judge. STATEMENT OF THE CASE. Upon a settlement of tbe accounts of Charles E. Blair, a resigned administrator of the estate of William E. Wiley, with George R. Davis administrator de bonis non of said estate, the probate court of Clark county found a balance of $820.52 in the hands of said C. E. Blair, together with a title paper to a town lot in the city of Oklahoma, which belonged to the estate of the decedent, and which the court thereupon ordered…

Relies on Noah v. German Insurance

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

AFFIRMED · Decided 1901-04-09

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 1936

4 state decisions

201901191019201930decided

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 →

BOND, I.

¶1It is insisted by the learned counsel for appellant that the motion filed at the subsequent term of the circuit court of Clark county to set aside a final judgment as shown upon the records of that court, at a former term, is an apt and proper method for procuring the vacation and annulment of the judgment claimed in said motion to have been entered upon the record of the court without its authority and without any appearance of the parties.

¶2In the view we take of the case, it is unnecessary to decide whether the motion in question is available as one in the nature of a writ of error coram nobis (63 Mo. App. loc. cit. 5), as proper under section .795, Revised Statutes 1899, permitting motions to set aside judgments for irregularities to be filed within three years, or as tantamount to a bill in equity to set aside a judgment claimed to have been procured by fraud, since *376the record and admissions of the parties on this appeal show the total extinguishment of the judgment sought to be attacked, by a full and complete performance of its mandate and directions. Noah v. Ins. Co. 78 Mo. App. 370.

¶3In view of this fact, it is wholly irrelevant whether the judgment was concocted by fraud or was validly entered upon the consent and appearance of the parties thereto. It is now fundus officio, wherefore the question of the legality or illegality of its obtension is a mere abstraction with which it is no part of the business of appellate courts to deal. Our conclusion is, that the learned circuit judge did not err in overruling the motion in question.

¶4The judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

All concur.
/88/moapp/372 · .json · Public domain