Leonard v. Sparks
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Saline Circuit Court. — Hon. Richard Field, Judge. (1) The notice to Edward H. Bouton in the mayor’s court was sufficient. It was served more than six days before the jury was impaneled. This was all that was required by the charter of the city.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Saline Circuit Court. — Hon. Richard Field, Judge. (1) The notice to Edward H. Bouton in the mayor’s court was sufficient. It was served more than six days before the jury was impaneled. This was all that was required by the charter of the city. Laws, 1875, p. 244, see. 2; see, also, Bowman v. B,ailroad, 102 111. 472. ’(2) The record shows that Bouton was a party to the proceedings, and the recital of the mayor’s record is that “the court adjudges that all parties have been duly notified and all persons interested duly served.” The cause was appealed to the circuit court by…
1Opinion
ON MOTION FOE EEHEABING.
Ellison, J.
A further examination of this cause discloses that, under the uniform ruling of the supreme court of this state, no jurisdiction whatever was obtained over the person of Bouton; and that the service was not merely defective, but was no service, and the judgment against him was not merely erroneous, but void. France v. Evans, 90 Mo. 74; and can be questioned collaterally. Howard v. Clark, 43 Mo. 344. So that if we concede for the moment that the jurisdiction involved by the defective service went only to the person, and not to the subject-matter, as is so…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Hagerman v. SuttonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Fithian v. MonksSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- Howard v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- Kronski v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Fitterling v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1883
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.