Buck v. Meyer
| Decision Date | 30 March 1916 |
| Docket Number | No. 17900.,17900. |
| Parties | BUCK v. MEYER et al. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Moniteau County; J. G. Slate, Judge.
Action by Anna C. Buck against Martin T. Meyer, administrator of the estate of John H. Asahl, deceased, and E. C. Nischwitz, executor of the last will of Anna Margaret Asahl, deceased. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant Nischwitz appeals. Transferred to the Kansas City Court of Appeals for final determination.
R. M. Embry and S. C. Gill, both of California, Mo., for appellant. Jay L. Oldham, of Kansas City, and Roy L. Kay, of California, Mo., for respondent.
I. Plaintiff sues to enforce an alleged oral agreement with her natural father that, if she would leave her home in Germany and locate where he lived in the United States, he would "adopt her as his child and make her his legal heir." Plaintiff alleges full performance on her part and nonperformance by her father, who has since died; wherefore she prays for a judgment of $5,000 against the administrator of his estate. To this action the executor of the estate of the second wife of plaintiff's father was afterwards made a defendant. There was a joinder of issues, and after the hearing of proofs the trial court found for plaintiff, concluding his judgment, to wit:
"Wherefore it is considered, adjudged, and decreed by the court that plaintiff be and she is hereby declared a pretermitted heir of John H. Asahl, deceased, and entitled to a share as an heir in the estate of John H. Asahl, deceased."
An appeal was duly taken to this court.
II. It is obvious the appeal in this cause should have been taken to the Kansas City Court of Appeals, within whose territorial jurisdiction the judgment was rendered. The petition only presents two aspects, one for a recovery of $5,000, the other for the enforcement of the oral agreement therein alleged. Neither of these purposes dislodges the jurisdiction of the Kansas City Court of Appeals, for they present no matter of dispute beyond the pecuniary limit of the jurisdiction of that court, nor do they present any question which falls within the appellate jurisdiction of this court as defined in the Constitution.
The cause is therefore transferred to the Kansas City Court of Appeals for final determination.
It is so ordered. All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McCary v. McCary
...will be found that most of the cases of this character are heard in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court transferred the case of Buck v. Meyer, 184 S. W. 977, which is similar to this one, to the Kansas City Court of Appeals on the ground that no real estate was involved, and that the value......
-
Buck v. Meyer
...the estate of John H. Asahl, and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Remanded, with direction to modify. See, also, 184 S. W. 977. R. M. Embry and S. C. Gill, both of California, Mo., for appellants. Charles R. Pence, of Kansas City, Roy L. Kay, of California, Mo., and J......
- Board of Education of City of St. Louis v. City of St. Louis
- Board of Education v. City of St. Louis