Dorman v. Coon

24 S.W. 731, 119 Mo. 68, 1893 Mo. LEXIS 106
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided December 23, 1893·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

Sherwood. J.

Ejectment for lands in Hickory county and judgment for defendant.

The record shows that leave was granted plaintiffs to file their bill of exceptions on the fourth judicial day of the next term of the court; but the bill was not filed until the twentieth day of May, which was the eighth judicial day of the next or May term of the court. This fact renders the bill worthless as a bill of exceptions. And the fact that the record shows that the bill was filed in open court by ‘'consent of parties,” gives the bill no judicial standing. After the time expires ■ for filing a bill, there does not exist any power in the court or out of it, or in the parties, or their counsel, further to extend the time. State v. Britt, 117 Mo. 584; State v. Apperson, 115 Mo. 470; State v. Scott, 113 Mo. 559.

As there is no error in the record proper, the judgment must be affirmed.

All concur.

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

Dorman v. Coon, 24 S.W. 731, 119 Mo. 68, 1893 Mo. LEXIS 106 (Mo. 1893).

24 S.W. 731 (Dorman v. Coon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Curtis v. Sexton
159 S.W. 512 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1913)
School District No. 1 v. Boyle
88 S.W. 136 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1905)
Powell v. Sherwood
63 S.W. 485 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1901)
Warder Bushnell & Glessner Co. v. Forman
83 Mo. App. 70 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1900)
Maddox v. Wabash Railroad
73 Mo. App. 510 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1898)
Cox v. Bright
65 Mo. App. 417 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1896)
State v. Harrison
62 Mo. App. 112 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1895)
Wyllie v. Heffernan
58 Mo. App. 657 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1894)
Fulkerson v. Murdock
27 S.W. 555 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1894)
Danforth v. Lindell Railway Co.
27 S.W. 715 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1894)