Thoms v. Sullivan

79 Mo. App. 384, 1899 Mo. App. LEXIS 295
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 21, 1899
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 79 Mo. App. 384 (Thoms v. Sullivan) 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
Thoms v. Sullivan, 79 Mo. App. 384, 1899 Mo. App. LEXIS 295 (Mo. Ct. App. 1899).

Opinion

BLAND, P. J.

On the twenty-third of December, 1898, defendants recovered a judgment against plaintiff in the Greene circuit court, from which on the same day plaintiff perfected an appeal to this court. This appeal plaintiff has wholly failed to prosecute, for which reason defendants have moved for an affirmance of the judgment, as provided by section 2252, Revised Statutes 1889. To escape the consequence of his neglect to prosecute his appeal, plaintiff has wired the court that he dismisses the appeal “to avoid an affirmance.” It seems to us that to allow the plaintiff to dismiss an appeal which he has taken no steps to bring here, after the defendant has in all respects complied with the provisions of section 2252, supra, to entitle him to an affirmance would be to deprive the defendants of a legal right which they have acquired by their dilligence, and at the same time would privilege the plaintiff to escape the legal consequence which he has incurred by reason of his neglgence, for should the appeal be dismissed, he, by writ of error, may have the [385]*385errors of the circuit court reviewed, and in this way defeat the penalty imposed by the statute, for failure to prosecute the appeal. We decline to set a precedent for such a practice, but will award the defendants the fruits of their diligence and affirm the judgment.

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

Related

Pine v. Rybolt
63 S.W.2d 28 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1933)
Bullock v. B. R. Electric Supply Co.
60 S.W.2d 733 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1933)
Broyles Ex Rel. Broyles v. State Highway Commission
8 S.W.2d 1021 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1928)
Erwin v. Missouri & Kansas Telephone Co.
158 S.W. 913 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 Mo. App. 384, 1899 Mo. App. LEXIS 295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thoms-v-sullivan-moctapp-1899.