Payne v. Collier
Supreme Court of Missouri
The- first error assigned is- general. • The second erroir assigned is the circuit court’s giving-judgment, as by default, for. want of a plea, whilst a motion, to quash writ was pending and undetermined, need not be-farther noticed than, by saying, that altho’ the circuit court does not consider a motion, as equivalent to a plea for the-purpose of staying proceedings until such motion be decided,, it is presumable that such doctrine will, scarcely be affirmed,, or deemed a…
Read the full summary
The- first error assigned is- general. • The second erroir assigned is the circuit court’s giving-judgment, as by default, for. want of a plea, whilst a motion, to quash writ was pending and undetermined, need not be-farther noticed than, by saying, that altho’ the circuit court does not consider a motion, as equivalent to a plea for the-purpose of staying proceedings until such motion be decided,, it is presumable that such doctrine will, scarcely be affirmed,, or deemed a matter- of doubtful disposition-. The third error assigned is the overruling motion to-quash writ. This depends upon the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court delivered by
M'&irk Judge.
The above cases are alike m every particular, except in the last case Collier and Pettus were joint plaintiffs, and in the first case Collier alone was the plaintiff. One opinion will dispose of both cases.
Collier brought his action under the petition and summons statute. The statute gives a defendant the three first days of the term to appear and file his plea. Before the ■ three days expired, the defendant, Payne, appeared and made a motion to quash the plaintiffs writ for the following reasons, to wit: 1st. The writ does not require the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Branstetter v. RivesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1864
- Hicks v. EllisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877