Gosline v. Thompson

61 Mo. 471
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 61 Mo. 471 (Gosline v. Thompson) 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
Gosline v. Thompson, 61 Mo. 471 (Mo. 1875).

Opinion

Napton, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit on a mechanic’s lien. The question was raised, by a motion to dismiss, whether the filing of the petition- was such a commencement of the action as section 16 of the act (2 Wagn. Stat., 911) required, or whether the action must be held to have been commenced from the dale of the writ issued on the petition. The fact in this case was that the petition was filed within the ninety days required, hut the writ issued the next day, which was outside of the ninety days. The court dismissed the action on the ground, that under the first section of the 4th article of the Practice act (Wagn. Stat., 1067) both the filing of the petition and the suing out the writ are necessary to constitute an institution of a suit.

We think this decision erroneous. The filing of the petition is the beginning of a suit, and is all the plaintiff can do to put in motion the machinery of the law. It- is the business of the clerk then to issue the writ, and his delay cannot prejudice the rights of the plaintiff, and this seems to have been the view of this court in Jones vs. Cox and others (7 Mo., 173), and Hite vs. Hunton (20 Mo., 286).

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

The other judges concur.

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

Related

Tice v. Milner
308 S.W.2d 697 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1957)
City of St. Louis v. Miller
145 S.W.2d 504 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1940)
Friel v. Alewel
298 S.W. 762 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1927)
State ex rel. Evans v. Broaddus
149 S.W. 473 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1912)
Mound City Co. v. Castleman
187 F. 921 (Eighth Circuit, 1911)
McCormick v. Clopton
130 S.W. 122 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
Mound City Co. v. Castleman
177 F. 510 (W.D. Missouri, 1910)
H. Hackfeld & Co. v. Hilo Railroad
14 Haw. 448 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1902)
McGrath v. St. Louis, Kansas City & Colorado Railroad
30 S.W. 329 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1895)
White v. Reed
60 Mo. App. 380 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1895)
Watkins v. St. Louis Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.
53 Mo. App. 659 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1893)
South Missouri Lumber Co. v. Wright
21 S.W. 811 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1893)
Kansas City Hydraulic Press Brick Co. v. Barker
50 Mo. App. 60 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1892)
Todd v. Crutsinger
30 Mo. App. 145 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1888)
Brown v. Shock
27 Mo. App. 351 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1887)
Spurlock v. Sproule
72 Mo. 503 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
61 Mo. 471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gosline-v-thompson-mo-1875.