Duff v. Karr
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Selden P. Spencer, Judge. (1) While the matter of granting new trials rests largely in the discretion of the trial court, particularly where its action is based upon the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence, yet, even where that is the ground alleged, the court will not be permitted to exercise its discretion arbitrarily or unreasonably. Knenzel v. Stevens, 13 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Selden P. Spencer, Judge. (1) While the matter of granting new trials rests largely in the discretion of the trial court, particularly where its action is based upon the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence, yet, even where that is the ground alleged, the court will not be permitted to exercise its discretion arbitrarily or unreasonably. Knenzel v. Stevens, 13 Mo. App. 16, 155 Mo. 285; Powell v. Eailway, 59 Mo. App. 346; Shaughnessy v. Eailway, 68 Mo. App. 155; Chouquette v. Eailroad, 152 Mo. 261. (2) While it is true…
1Opinion of the CourtBarclay, J.
— This is an action to recover one of the penalties mentioned in the Habeas Corpus Act.
Plaintiff’s claim is that the defendant, then superintendent of the workhouse in the city of St. Louis, Missouri, refused a copy of the commitment under which plaintiff was in custody there, in circumstances which make defendant liable to the penalty denounced by the following statute:
“Sec. 5404. Penalty for refusing copy of process. — Any officer or other person having the custody of any prisoner committed on any civil or criminal process, who shall refuse to give such prisoner a copy of the process, order…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Shaler v. Van WormerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1863
- Dunkin v. Mutual Benefit Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
- City of St. Louis ex rel. Duff v. KarrMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900
- Clamorgan & Lisa's Executors v. Guisse, Snider, Morrison & SummersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1821
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. WeitzelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Loew's Inc. v. ByramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Rural High School District No. 1 v. School District No. 58Idaho Supreme Court · 1921
- Pierce v. RileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- Drainage District Number 23 of New Madrid County v. HetlageMissouri Court of Appeals · 1937
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.