Smith v. Emerson

Missouri Court of Appeals

Smith v. Emerson

80 S.W. 922, 107 Mo. App. 208, 1904 Mo. App. LEXIS 249

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 10, 1904

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 80 S.W. 922 (Smith v. Emerson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Smith v. Emerson, 80 S.W. 922, 107 Mo. App. 208, 1904 Mo. App. LEXIS 249 (Mo. Ct. App. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

GOODE, J.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court sustaining plaintiff’s motion for new trial of the cause of action stated in his petition. The facts need not be given further than to say a counterclaim was filed by the defendant. There was a verdict for the plaintiff, for $1 on his cause of action and for the defendant for $30 on his counterclaim. Subsequently, on motion of the plaintiff, the court set aside the verdict in his favor on the ground that the assessment of nominal damages was against the weight of the evidence. The verdict on the counterclaim was allowed to stand.

[209]*209The record shows defendant’s bill of exceptions was filed long after the time fixed for filing it by tibe court’s order. His contention that a new trial was erroneously granted can not, therefore, be reviewed as it relates to matter of exception.

The order for new trial is affirmed and the cause remanded.

Bland, P. Jand Reyburn, J., concur.

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

GOODE, J.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court sustaining plaintiff’s motion for new trial of the cause of action stated in his petition. The facts need not be given further than to say a counterclaim was filed by the defendant. There was a verdict for the plaintiff, for $1 on his cause of action and for the defendant for $30 on his counterclaim. Subsequently, on motion of the plaintiff, the court set aside the verdict in his favor on the ground that the assessment of nominal damages was against the weight of the evidence. The verdict on the counterclaim was allowed to stand.

[209]*209The record shows defendant’s bill of exceptions was filed long after the time fixed for filing it by tibe court’s order. His contention that a new trial was erroneously granted can not, therefore, be reviewed as it relates to matter of exception.

The order for new trial is affirmed and the cause remanded.

Bland, P. Jand Reyburn, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 S.W. 922, 107 Mo. App. 208, 1904 Mo. App. LEXIS 249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-emerson-moctapp-1904.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack