Powell v. Gott
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR TO MONTGOMERY CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The first question presented for tho decision of lie court is, whether this proceeding by motion is barred by tbe 8tli section, 7th article, Practice at Law, p. 831. Tlie appearance of an infant by attorney is more than an irregularity — it is error in fact. This section only bars proceedings by motion for irregularity.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO MONTGOMERY CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The first question presented for tho decision of lie court is, whether this proceeding by motion is barred by tbe 8tli section, 7th article, Practice at Law, p. 831. Tlie appearance of an infant by attorney is more than an irregularity — it is error in fact. This section only bars proceedings by motion for irregularity. Irregularity is the transgressing of form or rule of procedure. 1 Tidd’s Pr. 581; 1 Duer & Paine’s Pr. 365; Jacobs’ Law Diet., “ it is the want of adherence to some rule or mode of proceeding, either in omitting what is necessary to be…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, J.
This was a motion to set aside a judgment obtained against an infant who appeared by attorney. The judgment was rendered in 1841, and the motion -was made in 1847, about two years after the defendant attained his majority. The motion was supported by several affidavits, both of the petitioner and others of his family to establish the truth of the facts stated therein. The motion was overruled by the Circuit Court.
• This is in the nature of a writ of error corum vobis. The object of this motion is to correct an error in fact, upon which certain proceedings in law have been based. The…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Sanders v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- People v. ReidCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- State ex rel. Potter v. RileySupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- State v. CalhounSupreme Court of Kansas · 1893
- Skipper v. SchumacherSupreme Court of Florida · 1936
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.