City of Caruthersville v. Palsgrove
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Pemiscot Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry G. Riley, Judge. (1) A prosecution for the violation of an ordinance is a civil action. Mexico v. Harris, 115 Mo. App. 711; Gallatin v. Tarwater, 143 Mo. 40; St. Louis v. Weitzel, 130 Mo. 600; Cassville v. Jimerson, 75 Mo. App. 426; California v. Harlan, 75 Mo. App. 506. (2) The rules applicable to criminal causes having no application, the appeal should be dismissed for failure to file abstracts and briefs.
1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, P. J.
This case originated in the police court of the city of Caruthersville, a city of the fourth class, in which court appellant was tried and convicted of maintaining a nuisance, in violation of the ordinance of that city. She appealed to the circuit court of Pemiscot county and at a trial there was again convicted and her punishment assessed at five dollars *565fine and costs of the canse. She afterwards duly perfected her appeal to this court, filing a full transcript here on the 4th of January, 1910. But appellant has in no other particular complied with the rules of this court governing the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- City of Gallatin v. TarwaterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- City of Mexico v. HarrisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
3Cited by3 opinions
- City of Poplar Bluff v. MeadowsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1915
- City of Hannibal v. DudleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Village of Marble Hill v. CaldwellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1915