Fowler & Wild v. Williams
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from, Livingston Circuit Cowrt. I. The judgment is irregular, and the motion in arrest should have been sustained. (Revis vs. Lamme & Bro., 2 Mo., ' 207; Rohrbough & Co. vs. Reed Bros., 57 Mo., 293.) I. The defendant could only have taken advantage of the error by plea in abatement. (Hawley vs. Blanton, 1 Mo., 49 ; Boise vs. Langham, 1 Mo., 572 ; Thompson vs. Elliot, 5 Mo., 118.)
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
Plaintiffs, by their firm name, commenced an action against the defendant before a justice of the peace.
In the justice’s court the parties appeared, and after the evidence was heard, a verdict was rendered for the defendant. Plaintiffs then paid the costs and took an appeal to the circuit court. In the latter court both parties appeared, and by mutual consent and agreement the case was referred. The referee took the testimony and reported in favor of the plaintiffs. No exceptions were taken to the report, and it was confirmed and judgment rendered thereon. Defendant then moved in arrest of…
2Cited by13 opinions
- State ex rel. Gracy v. Bank of NeoshoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Haney v. ThomsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1936
- Davis v. KlineSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- Neiswanger v. OrdSupreme Court of Kansas · 1909
- Unifund CCR Partners v. KinnamonMissouri Court of Appeals · 2012
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.