Martin v. Martin's Administrator
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Platte Circuit Court. I. The court erred in not permitting defendants to amend their pleading so as to include the sum of sixty dollars proven to have been paid on said notes. I. The court had no right to allow the amendment. It was proposed after the evidence was closed, and changed the defence in matter of substance.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Platte Circuit Court. I. The court erred in not permitting defendants to amend their pleading so as to include the sum of sixty dollars proven to have been paid on said notes. I. The court had no right to allow the amendment. It was proposed after the evidence was closed, and changed the defence in matter of substance. (2 R. C. 1855, p. 1855, sec. 8.) But had it been such an amendment as the court in its discretion could have permitted, the refusal to do so would not be interfered with by this court. Amendments are peculiarly within the, discretion of the inferior courts. (16 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, Judge
The practice of finding the facts in cases tried by the court without the intervention of a jury no longer obtains, and such cases, in which instructions are neither asked nor given, will not be reviewed in this court except on questions of law duly saved during the progress of a trial; and the finding of facts by the court can not be referred to for any legitimate purpose, as it has not properly any place under the present law in the record. A case then submitted to the court without a jury must be treated in all respects as if it had been tried by a jury, and this court will not interfere…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Kregain v. BlakeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1922
- Stewart v. GlennSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Scheerer v. WaltnerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1931
- Harkness v. JulianSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Brosius v. McGaughSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858