State ex rel. Winsor v. Taylor
Missouri Court of Appeals
Original Proceeding for Writ of Mandamus. (1) It was tbe duty of respondent, when tbe bill of exceptions was presented to bim to act, to sign it if tbe same was found to be correct; and it was equally bis duty if be thought the same was in any way imperfect to correct it and then sign it. He cannot be permitted to sacrifice the rights of litigants by his inaction. State ex rel. y. Field, 37 Mo.
Read the full summary
Original Proceeding for Writ of Mandamus. (1) It was tbe duty of respondent, when tbe bill of exceptions was presented to bim to act, to sign it if tbe same was found to be correct; and it was equally bis duty if be thought the same was in any way imperfect to correct it and then sign it. He cannot be permitted to sacrifice the rights of litigants by his inaction. State ex rel. y. Field, 37 Mo. App. 93. The court should have settled the bill of exceptions or signified his purpose not to do so as required by the statute within the period fixed by the order of the court extending the time for…
1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.
This is an original proceeding by mandamus. It is sought to compel the Hon. Daniel G. Taylor, one of the judges of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, to either sign or certify why be refuses to sign the bill of exceptions in a certain case wherein the relator William S. Winsor is defendant and *434Edward C. C. Reisel is plaintiff. The material facts appearing in the record disclose that Reisel recovered a judgment against relator Winsor in the division of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis over which the respondent, Judge Taylor, presides. In due time, relator filed his motion…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited7 opinions
- G., C. & S. F. R'y Co. v. HollidayTexas Supreme Court · 1886
- State ex rel. Priddy v. GibsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Bowen v. LazalereSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- State ex rel. Millett v. FieldMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- In re GardnerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Buck v. St. Louis Union Trust Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1916
- Chatterton v. BonelliWyoming Supreme Court · 1921
- State v. YowellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- Longmire v. Diagraph-Bradley Stencil MacHine Corp.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1943