City of Macon ex rel. Quincy National Bank v. Jaeger
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Macon Circuit Court. — Hon. Nat. M. Shelton, Judge. Respondent’s motion to affirm should be sustained, (a) There is no way of distinguishing what is matter of exceptions from what is record proper in appellant’s brief and abstract. The brief and abstract of appellant in this case leave the appellate court wholly in the dark as to this necessary distinction. Stark Bros. v. Martin, 126 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Macon Circuit Court. — Hon. Nat. M. Shelton, Judge. Respondent’s motion to affirm should be sustained, (a) There is no way of distinguishing what is matter of exceptions from what is record proper in appellant’s brief and abstract. The brief and abstract of appellant in this case leave the appellate court wholly in the dark as to this necessary distinction. Stark Bros. v. Martin, 126 Mo. App. 575; Thompson v. Ruddick, 213 Mo. 561, 111 S’. W. 1131. (b) The recitation in the bill of exceptions cannot be made a vehicle to carry into an appellate court that which is matter of record.…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
This action was brought on a special taxbill issued by a city of the third class for street improvements in such city. The judgment in the trial court sustained the taxbill and defendant appealed.
Relator asks that the judgment be affirmed on the ground that the record, as preserved in the abstract, does not preserve any error in the trial. An examination of the abstract discloses a record proper in which appears the petition and answer. Then follows matters of exception which must be set forth in a bill of exceptions. These are the proceedings at the trial, the result thereof, the action of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Harding v. BedollSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Stark v. ZehnderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Pennowfsky v. CoerverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Thompson v. RuddickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Clay v. Union Wholesale Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hutton & Little v. ClarkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Phoenix Stone & Lime Co. v. HugginsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Weber Implement Co. v. HillMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- D. H. Heltzell & Co. v. McDowellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Gray v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909