Cockrill v. McCurdy

33 Mo. 365
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedJanuary 15, 1863
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 33 Mo. 365 (Cockrill v. McCurdy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cockrill v. McCurdy, 33 Mo. 365 (Mo. 1863).

Opinion

Bates, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

All the evidence given by the plaintiff to show the disturbed condition of the country, as an excuse for not bringing suit within thirty days after the service of McCurdy’s notice upon him, taken together, constitutes no excuse whatever for his failure to bring the suit. During the whole thirty days, the Weston Court of Common Pleas was open to him, in which he could have sued without impediment; and during a large part of the thirty days there was no impediment to his suing in the Circuit Court of Plátte county, and he made no effort to bring suit in either of those courts.

We do not go to the length of declaring that there can be no excuse for failing to bring suit within .thirty days in any case. The case does not require us to determine that ques[370]*370tion. The evidence does not tend to show an excuse, and, therefore, it should have been excluded.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

Judges Bay and Dryden concur.

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

Related

Martinsburg Bank v. Bunch and Boil.
251 S.W. 742 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 Mo. 365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cockrill-v-mccurdy-mo-1863.