Igo v. Bradford
Missouri Court of Appeals
Error to Pettis Circuit Court. — Eon. Geo. F. Longan, Judge. (1) The contention of the defendants in error is that the notice of appeal was not sufficient. We contend that said notice was amply full and sufficient, and it conformed to the following requisite, (a) It was in writing and described the case fully and gave the date upon which judgment was rendered against plaintiff. R.. S. 1899, sec. 4074; Tiffin v. Millington^ 3 Mo. 418; Fagan v. Separator Co., 92 Mo.
Read the full summary
Error to Pettis Circuit Court. — Eon. Geo. F. Longan, Judge. (1) The contention of the defendants in error is that the notice of appeal was not sufficient. We contend that said notice was amply full and sufficient, and it conformed to the following requisite, (a) It was in writing and described the case fully and gave the date upon which judgment was rendered against plaintiff. R.. S. 1899, sec. 4074; Tiffin v. Millington^ 3 Mo. 418; Fagan v. Separator Co., 92 Mo. App. 236; Celia v. Schnairs, 42 Mo. App. 320. (b) It was signed by the appellant or by his attorney or agent. Celia v. Schnairs,…
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
— A motion has been filed by defendants to dismiss the writ of error. The only point made therein which we deem of sufficient importance to notice is that the written notice required by R. S. 1899, section 852, was not served twenty days before the return day of the writ. The proceedings were as follows:
February 16, 1904, writ of error issued returnable first day of March term, 1904, which was March seventh.
February 26, 1904, return made by circuit clerk.
February 24, 1904, written notice of writ served upon attorneys of record of defendants in error.
December 6, 1904, plaintiffs’ abstract,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kenner v. Doe Run Lead Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Tiffin v. MillingtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1834
- Holschen Coal Co. v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1892
- C. D. Smith Drug Co. v. HillMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
3Cited by13 opinions
- Audsley v. HaleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
- Barlow v. Shawnee Investment Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1932
- Davenport Vinegar & Pickling Works v. ShelleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1920
- Cooper v. Northern Accident Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- J. W. Teasdale & Co. v. American Fruit Product Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1906
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.