Bailey v. McWilliams
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jasper Circuit' Court: — No». Hugh G. Dabbs, Judge. (1) The trial court should have sustained the motion in arrest of judgment. There are five defendants in the suit, four of them were not mentioned in the finding and decree of the court. A decree must dispose of the rights of all the parties to- the- suit, McCord v. McCord, 77 Mo. 166; Ferguson' v. Thacker, 79 Mo. 511; Caulfield v. Parish, 24 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jasper Circuit' Court: — No». Hugh G. Dabbs, Judge. (1) The trial court should have sustained the motion in arrest of judgment. There are five defendants in the suit, four of them were not mentioned in the finding and decree of the court. A decree must dispose of the rights of all the parties to- the- suit, McCord v. McCord, 77 Mo. 166; Ferguson' v. Thacker, 79 Mo. 511; Caulfield v. Parish, 24 Mo. App: 110. (2) The plaintiff in his petition declares on one state of facts and recovers on another. He must recover, if at all, on his petition. Link v. Vaughn, 17 Mo. 585; Price v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBeoaddus, P. J.
Defendant’s abstract of the record proper failing to show that he filed a motion for a new trial, we cannot consider the cause on its merits. There is a recital in his bill of exceptions that such motion was filed. Eecord recitals contained only in the bill of exceptions cannot be considered on appeal. [St. Charles v. Deemar, 174 Mo. 122; Machine Co. v. Crawford, 98 Mo. App. 319; Parry v. Coffee Co., 98 Mo. 409.]
The objection is made that the petition shows that there were five defendants and the judgment is only against one of them. This is true, but the finding of the court as contained in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- City of St. Charles ex rel. Budd v. DeemarSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- Evans v. DavidSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
- McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. CrawfordMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903