Legal Opinion

B. Roth Tool Co. v. Champ Spring Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 30, 1909PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon* Daniel Gr. Taylor, Judge. (1) The court erred in refusing to dismiss plaintiff’s petition because parts of three amended petitions had been stricken out, by reason whereof, the court lost jurisdiction to proceed further in the case; Munford y. Keet has been overruled. Sidway y.

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon* Daniel Gr. Taylor, Judge. (1) The court erred in refusing to dismiss plaintiff’s petition because parts of three amended petitions had been stricken out, by reason whereof, the court lost jurisdiction to proceed further in the case; Munford y. Keet has been overruled. Sidway y. Land ,& Live Stock Co., 197 Mo. 359; Spurlock v. Railroad, 93 Mo. 13; Beardslee v. Morgner, 73 Mo. 22. (2) The decisions of this court in the B. Roth Tool Company v. Champ Spring Company, 122 Mo. App. 603, did not follow the last previous ruling of the Supreme Court on…

1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, P. J.

(after stating the facts). — ■ Counsel have made twenty-three assignments of error, which assignments they have discussed under twenty-four distinct heads. Grouping these, they may be said to cover eleven propositions. The first covers the refusal *24of the trial court to dismiss plaintiff’s case, defendant claiming that as parts of three amended petitions had been stricken out, plaintiff was out of court, and that the former decision of this court on this point is in conflict with a later decision of the Supreme Court. The second, being points three, four and five, is devoted to an argument of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Anchor Milling Co. v. WalshSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
  2. Chouteau v. GibsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
  3. Kansas City Exposition Driving Park v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  4. B. Roth Tool Co. v. Champ Spring Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1902
  5. Munford v. KeetSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hiatt Investment Co. v. BuehlerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1929
  2. In Re State to Issue Bonds to Fund IndebtednessSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
  3. Ward v. HarenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
  4. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. RossDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1950
  5. Klingenberg Son v. DavisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1925

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API