Higgins v. Ransdall
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR TO PETTIS CIRCUIT COURT. The facts iu this case, as they appear from the record, are that the defendant in error caused a notice to he served on the plaintiff in error, that he, Rans-dall, would present to the County Court of Pettis county, on the 1st Monday in December, 1848, for allowance against the estate of Abraham Higgins, deceased, a note and an account, setting out a copy of the note and account in the notice.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO PETTIS CIRCUIT COURT. The facts iu this case, as they appear from the record, are that the defendant in error caused a notice to he served on the plaintiff in error, that he, Rans-dall, would present to the County Court of Pettis county, on the 1st Monday in December, 1848, for allowance against the estate of Abraham Higgins, deceased, a note and an account, setting out a copy of the note and account in the notice. On the 1st Monday in December, upon the notice being filed in the County Court, the court continued the cause as to tiie note until the 1st Monday in February then next…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, J.
The only question in this case arises upon the construction of a section in the last article of our law of Administration,which requires all appeals from the CountyCourt to be taken “during the term at which the decision complained of is made.”
Ransdali obtained a judgment against the appellant upon a note at the February term, 1849, of the County Court of Pettis county, and after the judgment was rendered, the court adjourned to the first Monday in March, and after meeting on the 5th of March (which was the first Monday of that month), adjourned again until the first Monday of April, at which…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rose v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- State ex rel. Tucker v. MitchellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907