Stroeh v. Doggett Dry Goods Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. John W. Heney, Judge. (1) The judgment complained of was rendered more than three days after the cause was submitted to the justice for his final decision, and the statute, section 6279, Revised Statutes of 1889, is mandatory, and, therefore, jurisdictional.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. John W. Heney, Judge. (1) The judgment complained of was rendered more than three days after the cause was submitted to the justice for his final decision, and the statute, section 6279, Revised Statutes of 1889, is mandatory, and, therefore, jurisdictional. The legislature which enacted the statute under consideration evidently regarded it as mandatory in its entirety, and, therefore, they afterward enacted section 6299 of the same chapter. (2) The rendering of a judgment is a judicial act; the entering of the judgment in the justices’ docket is…
1Opinion
ON MOTION NOE, BEHEAEING.
Smith, P. J.
In the opinion, we adopted the ruling of the St. Louis court of appeals in Herwick v. Barber’s Supply Company, 61 Mo. App. 454, to the effect that under the provisions of section 6279, Revised Statutes, there is no essential distinction between the rendition of a judgment and its entry, and that a judgment, although rendered by a justice more than three days after a cause has been submitted to him, is valid. This view of the law is not questioned in the plaintiff’s *109motion. If the judgment was valid, then an execution could legally issue thereon and no…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Herwick v. Koken Barber Supply Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1895
- St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co. v. LowderMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894