Holdridge v. Marsh
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Hon. George W. Lubke, Judge. The alleged judgment upon which this suit is brought is not a legal or valid judgment. It is only a skeleton memorandum, and not such a record of a judgment as the law will recognize, or upon which a suit can be based.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Hon. George W. Lubke, Judge. The alleged judgment upon which this suit is brought is not a legal or valid judgment. It is only a skeleton memorandum, and not such a record of a judgment as the law will recognize, or upon which a suit can be based. Wheeler v. Scott, 3 Wis. 262; Martin v. Barnhardt, 39 111. 12; Falle v. Kellmus, 54 111. 189; Wright v. Fletcher, 12 Yt. 431; McNamara v. Caban, 33 N. W. Rep. 259; Reeside v. Wallcer, 11 How. 287; Lewis v. Walrus, 7' Neb. 479; Taylor v. Runyan, 3 Clarke (la.) 475; Freeman on Judgments, sec. 2. The court erred…
1Opinion of the CourtRombauer, P. J.
This is a suit for a balance upon a judgment recovered by plaintiff against the defendant before the dis- • trict court of the City of New York for the first judicial district. The action was instituted before a justice of the peace, where plaintiff had judgment. Upon trial anew in the circuit court, the plaintiff recovered judgment again. The defendant appealing assigns for errors the admission of incompetent testimony and the giving of erroneous instructions.
The defendant by a written plea made a number of special defences, but no evidence was offered in their support upon the trial, with…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Napton v. LeatonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Eager v. StoverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Wheeler v. ScottWisconsin Supreme Court · 1854
- Lewis v. WatrusNebraska Supreme Court · 1878