Carroll v. Frank
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel Dillon,- Judge. While the ordinary rule is that appellate courts will not entertain a point against the findings of a court or jury on the ground that such finding is .against the evidence, yet such rule is not one which will not admit of exception; and, where it appears from the record, that a judgment has not substantial evidence to support it, it will be reversed on appeal. Lionberger v. Pohlman, 16 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel Dillon,- Judge. While the ordinary rule is that appellate courts will not entertain a point against the findings of a court or jury on the ground that such finding is .against the evidence, yet such rule is not one which will not admit of exception; and, where it appears from the record, that a judgment has not substantial evidence to support it, it will be reversed on appeal. Lionberger v. Pohlman, 16 Mo. App. 392; Taylor v. Fox, 16 Mo. App. 531. And this rule does not apply when the evidence is given by deposition. And the burden…
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
This case was before the court on a former appeal, and is reported in 28 Mo. App. 69. Re-stating the case in outline, it is as follows: An attachment suit was brought before a justice of the peace, by.Henry Lyon & Son, against Jacob Karatofsky, and the writ was levied upon one zinc trunk and the contents thereof. Thereafter, the defendant in this action, Joseph Frank, brought an action of replevin before another justice of the peace, in which action he obtained the custody of the trunk and its contents from the constable. Thereafter the justice dismissed the action for want of jurisdiction,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lionberger v. PohlmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Bevis v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
- Carroll v. FrankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887