Mitchell v. Williams
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Texas Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Woodside, Judge. There is nothing before this court for review on this record. This is a summary proceeding by motion under section 574, Revised Statutes of 1889, and hence the appellants should have excepted to the action of the court in sustaining this motion and rendering a judgment against them thereon. This they did not do.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Texas Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Woodside, Judge. There is nothing before this court for review on this record. This is a summary proceeding by motion under section 574, Revised Statutes of 1889, and hence the appellants should have excepted to the action of the court in sustaining this motion and rendering a judgment against them thereon. This they did not do. The following will be found at foot of page 19, and top of page 20, of appellants’ abstract: “This was all the testimony in the case, and the court, after hearing the argument of counsel, found the issues in favor of…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
Ninety days after expiration of the term was allowed appellant in which to file bill of exceptions. His time to file under this order expired February 18, 1898. The bill of exceptions was filed February 15, 1898. By leave of this court the appellant has filed here the following paper:
“E. T. Mitchell, vs. I Motion for judgment on delivery bond. “James M. Orchard. J
“The time for filing bill of exceptions in the above entitled cause is hereby extended until the 15th day of March, A. D. 1898.”
“(Signed) L. B. Woodside, Judge.”
To this paper is attached a letter signed by Judge Wood-side to Mr.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ells v. Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- State v. SchuchmannSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- Anderson v. PembertonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- Lafollette v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Maddox v. Wabash RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Warder Bushnell & Glessner Co. v. FormanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900