State ex rel. United Railways Co. v. Reynolds
Supreme Court of Missouri
Certiorari. The Court of Appeals erred in holding that the errors assigned in the brief filed by appellant (relator here), assigning error on the giving of a certain instruction for respondent and the refusal to give certain instructions requested by appellant, could not be considered by the court for the reason that the motion for a new trial filed by appellant is not sufficiently specific; and said ruling is in conflict with the following controlling decisions of the…
Read the full summary
Certiorari. The Court of Appeals erred in holding that the errors assigned in the brief filed by appellant (relator here), assigning error on the giving of a certain instruction for respondent and the refusal to give certain instructions requested by appellant, could not be considered by the court for the reason that the motion for a new trial filed by appellant is not sufficiently specific; and said ruling is in conflict with the following controlling decisions of the Supreme Court: Wampler v. Railroad, 269 Mo. 464; Stid v. Railroad, 236 Mo. 382, 397; Collier v. Lead Co., 208 Mo. 246, 256;…
1Opinion of the CourtBlair, J.
Certiorari. In the case of Lampe v. United Railways/202 S. W. 438, the St. Louis Court of Appeals had before it a motion for a new trial upon these grounds:
“Because the court erred in refusing to give and read to the jury legal and proper instructions requested by defendant.
“Because the court erred in giving and reading to the jury erroneous, illegal and misleading instructions *557on behalf of plaintiff and over defendant’s objections thereto. ’ ’
The Court of Appeals held that these allegations of the motion were insufficient to present for review the question of the correctness or incorrectness…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Young v. Pennsylvania Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1916
- Polski v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1915
- Kansas City Disinfecting & Manufacturing Co. v. Bates CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
- State v. RoweSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
3Cited by24 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Nevins v. HughesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
- State Ex Rel. Hopkins v. DauesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
- Cremer v. MayMissouri Court of Appeals · 1928
- Drucker v. Western Indemnity Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1920
- Borrson v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1943
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.