Foster v. Trimble

18 Mo. App. 394, 1885 Mo. App. LEXIS 348
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 15, 1885·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Opinion by

Philips, P. J.

The appellant has failed to comply with the letter or the spirit of the statute, or rule fifteen of this court. He [395]*395has not filed any assignment of errors, nor has he filed any abstract of the record. He has simply filed a statement of what he conceives to be the important matters to be determined; bnt there is no abstract of the record, none of the evidence is given, nor a single instruction, nor anything constituting the record, or excerpts therefrom. The rule of court can not be evaded in this way. If the amount involved is too trifling to justify a compliance with the rules of court, the case ought not to be brought here. The failure to assign errors is fatal. Mister, admr. Dowling, v. Corrigan, ante, p. 217, decided at this term, and authorities cited.

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed..

All concur.

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

Foster v. Trimble, 18 Mo. App. 394, 1885 Mo. App. LEXIS 348 (Mo. Ct. App. 1885).

18 Mo. App. 394 (Foster v. Trimble) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Aultman & Taylor Co. v. Smith
52 Mo. App. 351 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1893)
Bank of Tipton v. Davidson
40 Mo. App. 421 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1890)
Coffey v. Dubois
35 Mo. App. 96 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1889)
State ex rel. Cox v. Pace
34 Mo. App. 458 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1889)
In re the Assignment of Redding Bros.
31 Mo. App. 425 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1888)
Goodson v. Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co.
23 Mo. App. 76 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1886)