Head v. Randolph
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Knox Circuit Court. — Hon. Edwin B. McKee, Judge. (1) It must be remembered that there was no motion for review, nor in arrest, filed in this case. The integrity of the judgment was not questioned by the so-called motion for a new trial. Nothing is better settled than that, after the term at which a final judgment is rendered, the court can not interfere with it, except for an irregularity in the judgment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Knox Circuit Court. — Hon. Edwin B. McKee, Judge. (1) It must be remembered that there was no motion for review, nor in arrest, filed in this case. The integrity of the judgment was not questioned by the so-called motion for a new trial. Nothing is better settled than that, after the term at which a final judgment is rendered, the court can not interfere with it, except for an irregularity in the judgment. It would hardly seem necessary to cite authorities in support of this proposition. However, I will submit the following: Ashby v. Glasgow, 7 Mo. 320; Hill v. St. Louis, 20…
1Opinion of the CourtEland, P. J.
Suit is on a promissory note. Defendant filed an answer at the December term, 1897, and the cause was continued to the succeeding term (June, 1898) on the motion of defendant. At the June term there was a mistrial and the cause went over to the December term, 1898, on the motion and at the cost of defendant, with leave to defendant to file an amended answer. At the December term, 1898, and on the eighth day of the month, the cause was called for trial. The defendant had not filed an amended answer, and was not present. His attorney, when the case was called, stated to the court, that the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Childs v. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Scott v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- Nelson v. GhiselinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Danforth v. LoweSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Orvis v. ElliottMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Wooten v. FriedbergSupreme Court of Missouri · 1946
- Harkness v. JarvisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
- Mid-States Equipment Corp. v. HOBART WELDERS S. & S.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1950
- Crockett Oil Company v. EffieMissouri Court of Appeals · 1964
- Peoples Bank of Holcomb v. BullockMissouri Court of Appeals · 1925
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.