Deck v. Wright
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Stoddard Circuit Court. — Eon. J. L. Fort, Judge. A judgment on which suit can be maintained must be final within the technical meaning of the term. Dow v. Blake, 39 Am. St. 161; Feeney v. Hinkley, 86 Am. St. 293; 23 Cyc. 1503. A judgment is not final which does not make some disposition of all the parties to the record. Implement Co. v. Marr, 168 M.o. 257; Baker y. St. Louis, 189 Mo. 878; Holborn v. Naughton, 60 Mo. App. 100; Webb y. Kansas City, 85 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Stoddard Circuit Court. — Eon. J. L. Fort, Judge. A judgment on which suit can be maintained must be final within the technical meaning of the term. Dow v. Blake, 39 Am. St. 161; Feeney v. Hinkley, 86 Am. St. 293; 23 Cyc. 1503. A judgment is not final which does not make some disposition of all the parties to the record. Implement Co. v. Marr, 168 M.o. 257; Baker y. St. Louis, 189 Mo. 878; Holborn v. Naughton, 60 Mo. App. 100; Webb y. Kansas City, 85 Mo. App. 148; McCord y. McCord, 77 Mo. 166. The judgment upon Avhich this suit is founded and which was rendered in the justice…
1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, P. J.
This action was begun by attachment before a justice of the peace of Stoddard county. The only statement filed before the justice was an affidavit of respondent to the effect that he has a just demand against T. J. Wright and F. H. Wright, the appellants here, amounting to $63.63 principal and five years’ interest, $50.88, together with $23.90 costs— a total of $138.38; that respondent was the purchaser and assignee of a certain judgment rendered in a justice’s court in favor of one Dublin, on April 13, 1900; that respondent “is suing out this writ of attachment as assignee” upon said…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dow v. BlakeIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
- Bredell v. CollierSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Feeney v. HinckleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Rock Island Implement Co. v. MarrSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Baker v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cox v. Frank L. Schaab Stove & Furniture Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1933
- Costello v. City of KansasMissouri Court of Appeals · 1921
- Price v. SanditenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
- Russell Grain Co. v. Chicago, Great Western RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1922