Pratt v. Rogers
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR- to the circuit court of-Marion county. The points raised here for appellant are, 1. That the court erred in refusing to set aside the judgment- and' grant a continuance. 2. That the court erred in giving judgment for the plaintiff, without a finding upon ail the isspesin the cause.For the last point, see Leak v. Elliott, decided by this court-at its last term, and the authorities relied on in that case; also Archbold’s Appendix, page 145; likewise,-3 vol. Mo.
Read the full summary
ERROR- to the circuit court of-Marion county. The points raised here for appellant are, 1. That the court erred in refusing to set aside the judgment- and' grant a continuance. 2. That the court erred in giving judgment for the plaintiff, without a finding upon ail the isspesin the cause.For the last point, see Leak v. Elliott, decided by this court-at its last term, and the authorities relied on in that case; also Archbold’s Appendix, page 145; likewise,-3 vol. Mo. Decis. p. 390, Jones and Jones v. Snider,a' case precisely in point. The firs't error assigned by the appellant is, that the…
1Opinion of the Court
Edwards, Judge,
delivered the opinion of the court.*
This was an action of petition in debt, brought by-Rogers against Pratt, on a note. Pleas, non assumpsit and set off. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. The defendant afterwards, and during t.he same term, moved the court to set aside the judgment and grant a continuance, upop facts set out in two affidavits filed. This motion was overruled.
The first error assigned by the appellant is, “that the circuit court erred in overruling the motion of said appellant, to set aside the judgment rendered in said cau^e, grant a continuance thereof.” No…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. CroninSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- City of St. Louis v. Senter Commission Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1937
- Advance Thresher Co. v. SpeakMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
- Finney v. StateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1845