Carpenter v. Meyers
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. I. Defendant not having been personally served with process, the case was not triable at the return term. (R. C. 1855, p. 1259, Prac. Act, § 4 & 5.) The general rule by the statute is that all cases shall be continued at the return term, and the 24th, 25th and 26th secs, of Art. 6, p. 1235, changes this rule only in cases where there is personal service in cases of bills, bonds and notes.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. I. Defendant not having been personally served with process, the case was not triable at the return term. (R. C. 1855, p. 1259, Prac. Act, § 4 & 5.) The general rule by the statute is that all cases shall be continued at the return term, and the 24th, 25th and 26th secs, of Art. 6, p. 1235, changes this rule only in cases where there is personal service in cases of bills, bonds and notes. Sec. 25 of the Land Court Act of St. Louis county (R. C. 1855, p. 1595) controls this matter, making all cases in St. Louis courts, where there has been fifteen days’…
1Opinion of the CourtBay, Judge
Plaintiffs brought suit against defendant on a promissory-note in the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, returnable to the October term, 1858. The note was for the sum of $217.69, dated 19th of August, 1857, and made payable to the order of plaintiffs seven months after date. The summons was served on the 16th of September, 1858, by leaving a copy of the writ and petition at the usual place of abode of defendant, with a white person of his family over the age of fifteen years.
The answer alleges that the note was given in consideration of a bill of goods, purchased in the city of New York, to be…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Voss v. McGuireMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- State v. LangeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875