Schilling v. Speck

26 Mo. 489
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedMarch 15, 1858
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 26 Mo. 489 (Schilling v. Speck) 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
Schilling v. Speck, 26 Mo. 489 (Mo. 1858).

Opinion

Richardson, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

There is no bill of exceptions in this case, and, as we can not see the evidence, instructions or motions of any kind, we can only notice such questions as arise on the record proper. It appears that the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for seven hundred and fifty-two dollars and sixty-nine cents, for which sum judgment was immediately rendered. Several weeks afterwards, during the term, the following entry was made : “ Now at this day comes said plaintiff by his attorney and remits one hundred dollars of the judgment herein, and the court having duly heard and considered the motion for a, new trial herein, and being fully advised of and concerning the premises, doth consider and adjudge that said motion be overruled.” No other entry appears in the transcript after the judgment, except the one allowing an appeal.

It does not appear that the judgment was corrected after the remittitur, but it was allowed to stand for the full amount of -the verdict. It was the duty of the plaintiff to have seen that the judgment was properly entered, and for a sum not greater than he was entitled to ; and for this error the judgment of the circuit court will be reversed, and judgment will be rendered in this court for the amount the plaintiff was entitled to after the remittitur. (Johnson v. Robertson, 1 Mo. 615)

The other judges concur.

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

Related

Walton v. United States Steel Corp.
378 S.W.2d 240 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1964)
Steuernagel v. St. Louis Public Service Co.
238 S.W.2d 426 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1951)
Gray v. Doe Run Lead Co.
53 S.W.2d 877 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1932)
Partello v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
107 S.W. 473 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
State ex rel. Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Broaddus
111 S.W. 508 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1908)
White v. Reitz
108 S.W. 601 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
Stolze v. St. Louis Transit Co.
99 S.W. 471 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1907)
Barado-Ghio Real Estate Co. v. Heidbrink
86 S.W. 1109 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1905)
Dawson v. Waldheim
81 Mo. App. 636 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1899)
Chambers' Administrator v. Smith's Administrator
30 Mo. 156 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1860)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 Mo. 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schilling-v-speck-mo-1858.