State ex rel. Brainerd v. Thayer
Supreme Court of Missouri
Prohibition. The judgment of the court of.appeals was not superseded by the appeal. It was actually and fully executed before any appeal was taken. High Extra. Rem., § 766; Smith v. Allen, 2 E. D. Smith 259; Sherrill v. Campbell, 21 Wend. 287. An appeal accompanied by a bond operates a supersedeas only in the case in which it is pending. Welch v. Cook, 7 How. Pr. 287; Wilkes v. Henry, 4 Sandf.
Read the full summary
Prohibition. The judgment of the court of.appeals was not superseded by the appeal. It was actually and fully executed before any appeal was taken. High Extra. Rem., § 766; Smith v. Allen, 2 E. D. Smith 259; Sherrill v. Campbell, 21 Wend. 287. An appeal accompanied by a bond operates a supersedeas only in the case in which it is pending. Welch v. Cook, 7 How. Pr. 287; Wilkes v. Henry, 4 Sandf. Ch. 395. Before this court will grant a writ of prohibition, it should clearly appear that the circuit court has no jurisdiction. High Extra. Rem., §§ 767, 770, 780 ; Lx parte Peterson, 33 Ala. 78. The…
1Opinion of the CourtHenry, J.
Challes O. Patier and William Wolf sued relator in the circuit court of St. Louis, on two promissory notes. Brainerd, in his answer, pleaded two counter-claims, and on a trial of the cause before Judge Adams, on the 29th day of April, 1882, the jury returned a verdict against plaintiff for $2,000 on the first counter-claim, and for plaintiff on the second. The court, of its own motion, set aside the verdict, and afterward, May 4th, 1882, defendant moved for a judgment on the verdict, which the court overruled on the 12th of May, whereupon the defendant applied to the St. Louis court of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Parmer v. AndersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
3Cited by2 opinions
- Wand v. RyanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Bank of Tipton v. CochelMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887