Woods, Christy & Co. v. Mosier

Supreme Court of Missouri

Woods, Christy & Co. v. Mosier

22 Mo. 335

CourtSupreme Court of Missouri

DecidedJanuary 15, 1856

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 22 Mo. 335 (Woods, Christy & Co. v. Mosier) 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

Woods, Christy & Co. v. Mosier, 22 Mo. 335 (Mo. 1856).

Pincite

Opinion

Ryland, Judge,

delivered the opinion o£ the court.

The plaintiffs brought their suit, upon a promissory note, against the defendants, in the circuit court of McDonald county. The summons and petition were personally served on one of the defendants, Thomas W. Mosier, and there was constructive service on the other defendant by order of publication in a newspaper. The. circuit court rendered judgment by default against the defendants, and they bring the case by writ of error to this court; and rely upon the insufficiency of the published notice. In looking into the record, it seems that no motion has been made to set aside the proceedings in the circuit court, and until that is done, this court does not interfere to correct the supposed error. (Alexander v. Hayden, 2 Mo. 211, side paging; 10 Mo. 457; 15 Mo. 207, 208.) The judgment must be affirmed;

Judge Leonard concurring. Judge Scott absent.

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

Ryland, Judge,

delivered the opinion o£ the court.

The plaintiffs brought their suit, upon a promissory note, against the defendants, in the circuit court of McDonald county. The summons and petition were personally served on one of the defendants, Thomas W. Mosier, and there was constructive service on the other defendant by order of publication in a newspaper. The. circuit court rendered judgment by default against the defendants, and they bring the case by writ of error to this court; and rely upon the insufficiency of the published notice. In looking into the record, it seems that no motion has been made to set aside the proceedings in the circuit court, and until that is done, this court does not interfere to correct the supposed error. (Alexander v. Hayden, 2 Mo. 211, side paging; 10 Mo. 457; 15 Mo. 207, 208.) The judgment must be affirmed;

Judge Leonard concurring. Judge Scott absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 Mo. 335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woods-christy-co-v-mosier-mo-1856.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack