Dawson v. Waldheim
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Selclen P. Spencer, Judge. No new judgment having been rendered by the court upon the filing and announcement of -remittitur by plaintiff, there, was no legal support for the issue of the execution attacked. “It does not appear that the judgment was corrected after the remittitur, but it was allowed to stand for the full amount of the verdict.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Selclen P. Spencer, Judge. No new judgment having been rendered by the court upon the filing and announcement of -remittitur by plaintiff, there, was no legal support for the issue of the execution attacked. “It does not appear that the judgment was corrected after the remittitur, but it was allowed to stand for the full amount of the verdict. It was the duty of the plaintiff to have seen that the judgment was properly entered, and for a sum not greater than he was entitled to; and for this error the judgment of the circuit court will be…
1Opinion of the CourtBond, J.
This is a motion to qnash an execution upon a judgment in favor of respondent and against appellant for $805, rendered October 19, 1898. A remittitur of $7 of said judgment was filed in the circuit court on the third of November, 1898. Upon a subsequent appeal to this court the judgment was affirmed, but neither here nor in the lower court was any new judgment rendered after the remittitur was filed. On May 25, 1899, an execution was taken out on said judgment, which recited the said remittitur. On the same day the present motion to recall and set aside such execution was filed, which after a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Schilling v. SpeckSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dawson v. WaldheimMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Dawson v. WaldheimMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Partello v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1910