Barnes v. Barnes
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court. — Son. Samuel Davis, Judge. (1) The court erred in sustaining said motion. The amendment is expressly allowed by article YI, chapter 8, section 663, Stat. 1899. Title, “Amending Pleadings and Proceedings.” (2) The court erred in holding that the above statute did not apply to the present proceedings, notwithstanding section 675 of the statutes, being a part of said article VI.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court. — Son. Samuel Davis, Judge. (1) The court erred in sustaining said motion. The amendment is expressly allowed by article YI, chapter 8, section 663, Stat. 1899. Title, “Amending Pleadings and Proceedings.” (2) The court erred in holding that the above statute did not apply to the present proceedings, notwithstanding section 675 of the statutes, being a part of said article VI. (3) The amendment should have been allowed expressly to avoid the Statute of Limitations. This is the construction placed upon the Statute of Amendments by the Supreme Court of…
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
This is a proceeding to review a judgment by default rendered against the petitioner, James S. Barnes, in an attachment suit prosecuted in the circuit court of LaFayette county by the respondent, Frank C. Barnes. The trial court sustained the motion of respondent to strike out an amended petition filed by the petitioner and, on his refusal to plead further, adjudged “that the petition of plaintiff, James S. Barnes, heretofore filed in said cause be and the same is dismissed, that the original judgment rendered in the case of Frank C. Barnes against James S. Barnes in this *549court stand absolute…
2Cited by1 opinion
- State Ex Rel. Wallace State Bank v. TrimbleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1925