Bohn v. Devlin
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioner’s Court.
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, Judge
The defendant in this case did not reside in the township where the suit was brought, and the proceeding, being in this respect irregular, could no doubt have been set aside had the proper steps been taken in time. But the defendant appeared and consented to a continuance. As the justice had undoubted jurisdiction over the subject matter, and the appearance and consent of the defendant gave jurisdiction of the person, the defects and irregularity in the process must be considered as waived. (Davis v. Wood, 7 Mo.-; Myers v. Woolfolk, 3 Mo. 246 ; Busnell and others v. Lynch, 3 Mo. 261; Malone…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Baisley v. BaisleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Rogers v. DavisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1916
- Cella v. SchnairsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
- Higgins v. BeckwithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- Pearson v. GillettMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.