Wetherall v. Harris
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Pike Circuit Court. No formal motion for new trial was necessary. There was but one point in the ease, and exceptions were saved to the ruling of the court below.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pike Circuit Court. No formal motion for new trial was necessary. There was but one point in the ease, and exceptions were saved to the ruling of the court below. (Fine v. Rogers, 15 Mo. 315 ; Wagner v. Jacoby, 26 Mo. 532 ; Prince v. Cole, 28 Mo. 486; Gray v. Heslep, 33 Mo. 238.) This court will not consider any errors alleged in a bill of exceptions outside of the record proper, when no motion for a new trial has been made. .(The State v. Marshall, 36 Mo. 400; Hoppe v. Stone, 39 Mo. 378 ; Banks v. Lades, id. 406; Bishop v. Ranson, id. 416; Long v. Towl, 41 Mo. 398 ; Morgner v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBliss, Judge
The plaintiff, Emma T., was the daughter of Wm. A. Harris, deceased, who made a will, giving all his property to his widow, the defendant, making no provision, as is alleged, for his said daughter. She and her husband present their petition, setting *67out the real estate of deceased, describing the will, and ask that defendant be adjudged to deliver her the portion of the estate she would be entitled to had her father died intestate. Upon the trial the court gave judgment for defendant, construing the will as having in effect named or made provision for the said Emma T. A bill of exceptions was…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. MarshallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Pounds v. DaleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
3Cited by13 opinions
- Wadsworth v. BrighamOregon Supreme Court · 1927
- Bevin v. PowellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
- Newman v. WatermanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
- Thomas v. BlackSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Smith v. SteenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1915
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.