City of Caruthersville v. Palsgrove

• Decision Date: 21 February 1911
• Parties: CITY OF CARUTHERSVILLE v. PALSGROVE.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

134 S.W. 1032

155 Mo. A. 564

CITY OF CARUTHERSVILLE v. PALSGROVE.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

February 21, 1911.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (§ 642) — AFFIRMANCE — INSUFFICIENT PRESENTATION OF APPEAL.

A prosecution for violating a city ordinance being a civil action, a conviction will be affirmed on noncompliance with the statute and rules governing prosecution of civil appeals, which require filing of abstracts, briefs, assignments of or joinder in error, etc.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pemiscot County; Henry C. Riley, Judge.

Willie Palsgrove was convicted of violating an ordinance of the City of Caruthersville by maintaining a nuisance, and she appeals. Affirmed.

J. S. Gossom and Ward & Collins, for appellant. Everett Reeves and Vance J. Higgs, for respondent.

REYNOLDS, P. J.

This case originated in the police court of the city of Caruthersville, a city of the fourth class, in which court appellant was tried and convicted of maintaining a nuisance, in violation of the ordinances of that city. She appealed to the circuit court of Pemiscot county, and at a trial there was again convicted, and her punishment assessed at $5 fine and costs of the cause. She afterwards duly perfected her appeal to this court, filing a full transcript here on the 4th of January, 1910. But appellant has in no other particular complied with the rules of this court governing the filing of abstracts, briefs, and arguments, nor has any assignment or joinder in error, if that is required, been filed in this court. Counsel for the city move to dismiss the appeal or affirm the judgment of the circuit court for failure of appellant to comply with rules 13, 14, 16, and 18 of this court (112 S. W. vi, vii).

Our statute (section 5312, Rev. St. 1909) provides that no assignment of error or joinder in error shall be necessary upon any appeal or writ of error in any criminal cause, but that the appellate court shall proceed upon the return thereof without delay and render judgment on the record before it. This section, in terms, is applicable to criminal cases alone. This court, in the case of City of Mexico v. Harris, 115 Mo. App. 707, loc. cit. 711, 92 S. W. 505, following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of City of Gallatin v. Tarwater, 143 Mo. 40, 44 S. W. 750, and other cases cited in the opinion (115 Mo. App., loc. cit. 711, 92 S. W. 505), held that a prosecution for a violation of a city ordinance is not a criminal, but a civil, action. Hence the rules...