Strother v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railroad
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Jackson Circnit Court. — Hon. William O. Thomas, Judge. A writ of error will not lie from an error sustaining a motion for new trial, as is sought in this case, hence the writ should be quashed. R. S. 1909, sec. 2054; Emerson v. Harriett, 11 Mo. 413; Padgett v. Smith, 205 Mo. 122; Kroeger, v. Dash, 82 Mo.
Read the full summary
Error to Jackson Circnit Court. — Hon. William O. Thomas, Judge. A writ of error will not lie from an error sustaining a motion for new trial, as is sought in this case, hence the writ should be quashed. R. S. 1909, sec. 2054; Emerson v. Harriett, 11 Mo. 413; Padgett v. Smith, 205 Mo. 122; Kroeger, v. Dash, 82 Mo. App. 333. 1 Black, Judgments, sec. 21, says: “Where a controversy between two parties is ended so far as the court before which it is pending can end it, the judgment is then final, regardless of the mere matter of form.” The lower court incorrectly and informally sustained a motion…
1Opinion of the Court
ROY, C.
— Homer S. Martin recovered judgment against the defendant in error for $14,000 as damages for personal injuries. A motion for a new trial on the part of the defendant was sustained. From -the order sustaining that motion the plaintiff came to this court on a writ of error. Since the writ issued the *431plaintiff died and the cause has been revived in the name of his administrator.
Defendant in error makes the point that the propriety of the trial court’s action in sustaining a motion for a new trial cannot he tested under a writ of error. We think the point well taken. Section 2054,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Padgett v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Kroeger v. DashMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ridge v. WittmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1933