Bridgeford v. Steam Boat Elk
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis circuit court. 1. By the sixth section of the supplement, it is provided, that in all suits of this kind, the court shall be governed by its ordinary rules of practice. 2. The judgment by default was regularly taken under the statute (R. C. 460, sec. 31,) the defendant having failed to plead; the memorandum, or entry, upon the law docket, being a nullity, and the merest evasion of the rule of court; it was a violation of the-implied faith that a plea, such…
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis circuit court. 1. By the sixth section of the supplement, it is provided, that in all suits of this kind, the court shall be governed by its ordinary rules of practice. 2. The judgment by default was regularly taken under the statute (R. C. 460, sec. 31,) the defendant having failed to plead; the memorandum, or entry, upon the law docket, being a nullity, and the merest evasion of the rule of court; it was a violation of the-implied faith that a plea, such as would go to the merits, should be filed, the defendant having-procured an extension of time for pleading. 3. No…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the court delivered by
Napton Judge.
The complaint of Bridgeford, Rickets & Co. against the steam boat Elk, was instituted according to the provisions of the act'to provide for the collection of demands against boats and vessels.
The defendant, in the court below, before the time for pleading expired, filed a motion to quash, because of the insufficiency of the affidavit. Before the motion came on to be heard, plaintiff took judgment by default. The motion to quash was afterwards heard by the court, and the court set aside the judgment by default, and quashed.
The view which I…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Ackerman v. GreenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Eldridge v. Steamboat William CampbellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1859
- Hamilton v. The Steamboat IrontonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1854