Welsh v. City of St. Louis

73 Mo. 71
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1880
StatusPublished
Cited by36 cases

This text of 73 Mo. 71 (Welsh v. City of St. Louis) 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
Welsh v. City of St. Louis, 73 Mo. 71 (Mo. 1880).

Opinions

Sherwood, C. J.

The statute is imperative that the motion for a new trial shall be made within four days after the trial. 2 Wag. Stat., p. 1059, § 6. It does not appear in this case, either from the record proper or from the bill of exceptions, when that motion was filed. If not filed in time, the only thing the circuit court could do, even if believing error had been committed during the progress of the trial, was to deny the motion. And if the motion was denied in such circumstances, there was no error in such denial, notwithstanding error may have been committed while the trial was progressing. Eor aught that appears to the contrary, the motion may have been denied, not upon the merits, but because the requirements of the statute had not been complied with ; in which case, no error was committed. in denying the motion. He who alleges error must prove it, as every presumption will be made in favor of the correctness of the ruling of the lower court. Stewart v. Small, 5 Mo. 525; Vaughn v. Montgomery, 5 Mo. 529; Small v. Hempstead, 7 Mo. 373; Walter v. Cathcart, 18 Mo. 256; State v. Rogers, 36 Mo. 138. But while this presumption is indulged in favorable to the action of the circuit courts, no presumptions are indulged that parties file their motions in time. Eor these reasons we affirm the judgment.

All concur.

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

Related

Tower v. the City of St. Louis
148 S.W.2d 100 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1941)
Lewis Ex Rel. Lewis v. Kansas City
122 S.W.2d 852 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1938)
Metz v. Kansas City, Mo.
81 S.W.2d 462 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1935)
Shafir v. Carroll
274 S.W. 755 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1925)
Lindman v. Kansas City
271 S.W. 516 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1925)
Gerber Ex Rel. Gerber v. City of Kansas City
263 S.W. 432 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1924)
Boyd v. Kansas City
237 S.W. 1001 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1922)
Montain v. City of Fargo
166 N.W. 416 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1917)
Mullery v. Missouri & Kansas Telephone Co.
168 S.W. 213 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
Schlinski v. City of St. Joseph
156 S.W. 823 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1913)
Salmon v. Kansas City
145 S.W. 16 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1912)
Sappington v. City of Centralia
144 S.W. 1112 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1912)
Sutter v. Kansas City
119 S.W. 1084 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1909)
Benton v. City of St. Louis
118 S.W. 418 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1909)
Ford v. Kansas City
79 S.W. 923 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1904)
Jerowitz v. Kansas City
77 S.W. 1088 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1904)
Long v. Hawkins
77 S.W. 77 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1903)
Estate of Pound v. Cassity
91 Mo. App. 424 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1902)
City of Indianapolis v. Marold
58 N.E. 512 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1900)
Kossman v. City of St. Louis
54 S.W. 513 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 Mo. 71, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welsh-v-city-of-st-louis-mo-1880.