Butler v. Pierce

Missouri Court of Appeals

Butler v. Pierce

90 S.W. 425, 115 Mo. App. 40, 1905 Mo. App. LEXIS 377

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 4, 1905

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 90 S.W. 425 (Butler v. Pierce) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Butler v. Pierce, 90 S.W. 425, 115 Mo. App. 40, 1905 Mo. App. LEXIS 377 (Mo. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

— On a trial of this case before a justice of the peace, defendant recovered judgment. Several days thereafter and in proper time, plaintiff took an appeal to the circuit court, but failed to notify the defendant, and no appearance being entered at the first term of the latter court, the cause was continued. On the second day of the following term the court permitted plaintiff to take a voluntary nonsuit. The next day the defendant filed motions to set aside the judgment of non-suit and to affirm the judgment appealed from, upon the ground that as the nonsuit was entered without his knowledge or consent he was deprived of the right to exercise the option accorded him under Revised Statutes 1899, section 4076. These motions were supported by proof, but were overruled, and defendant appealed.

The motions should have been sustained. The failure of plaintiff to- give the statutory notice gave defendant, under Revised Statutes, section 4076, the absolute right to control the disposition of the case. It was for him to say whether the appeal should be dismissed or the judgment affirmed. He was not suffered to exercise this option, and therefore was deprived of a substantial right. [Wolff v. Coffin, 46 Mo. App. 190; Hammel v. Weis, 54 Mo. App. 14; Holloman v. Railroad, 92 Mo. 284; Hathaway v. Railroad, 94 Mo. App. 343; Studer v. Federle, 57 Mo. App. 534.]

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to enter judgment in accordance with the views expressed.-

All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JOHNSON, J.

— On a trial of this case before a justice of the peace, defendant recovered judgment. Several days thereafter and in proper time, plaintiff took an appeal to the circuit court, but failed to notify the defendant, and no appearance being entered at the first term of the latter court, the cause was continued. On the second day of the following term the court permitted plaintiff to take a voluntary nonsuit. The next day the defendant filed motions to set aside the judgment of non-suit and to affirm the judgment appealed from, upon the ground that as the nonsuit was entered without his knowledge or consent he was deprived of the right to exercise the option accorded him under Revised Statutes 1899, section 4076. These motions were supported by proof, but were overruled, and defendant appealed.

The motions should have been sustained. The failure of plaintiff to- give the statutory notice gave defendant, under Revised Statutes, section 4076, the absolute right to control the disposition of the case. It was for him to say whether the appeal should be dismissed or the judgment affirmed. He was not suffered to exercise this option, and therefore was deprived of a substantial right. [Wolff v. Coffin, 46 Mo. App. 190; Hammel v. Weis, 54 Mo. App. 14; Holloman v. Railroad, 92 Mo. 284; Hathaway v. Railroad, 94 Mo. App. 343; Studer v. Federle, 57 Mo. App. 534.]

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to enter judgment in accordance with the views expressed.-

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 S.W. 425, 115 Mo. App. 40, 1905 Mo. App. LEXIS 377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butler-v-pierce-moctapp-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack