City of Huntsville v. Hamilton Estate
| Decision Date | 01 December 1930 |
| Docket Number | No. 17017.,17017. |
| Citation | 33 S.W.2d 185 |
| Parties | CITY OF HUNTSVILLE ex rel. JOHNSON v. HAMILTON ESTATE. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Randolph County; A. W. Walker, Judge.
"Not to be officially published."
Action by the City of Huntsville, on the relation of Norman C. Johnson, against Hamilton Estate. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. On motion to dismiss the appeal.
Motion sustained, and appeal dismissed.
John N. Hamilton, of Huntsville, for appellant.
Norman C. Johnston, of Huntsville, and Hunter & Chamier, of Moberly, for respondent.
This appears to be an action upon special tax bills issued by the city of Huntsville for street improvement. The short form transcript filed here shows that the trial court found for plaintiff, declared a special lien upon the property against which the bills were issued, and that defendant was granted an appeal to this court.
We have before us respondent's motion to dismiss the appeal. It is based upon numerous grounds, some of which are: (1) That the abstract of the record proper fails to show that there was a trial, and fails to show that a judgment was rendered. (2) It fails to show that an appeal was granted. (3) It fails to show that a bill of exceptions was filed and made a part of the record. (4) The statement and brief fail to show a clear and concise statement of the case, and fail to set out any alleged error committed by the trial court; all of which are said to be in violation of the statute, section 1479, Rev. St. 1919, and rules 15, 16, 17, and 26 of this court. The motion with notice that it would be filed was served on counsel for appellant more than ten days before the day on which the cause was docketed for hearing. Appellant made no effort to supply the alleged deficiency or to perfect the abstract of the record.
The appellant filed here what is designated "Abstract of Record," and under this caption is set out a copy of the petition and answer showing the dates of filing. There is no recital whatever of a single fact pertaining to the time or place of institution of the suit, trial, judgment, appeal, or the filing of a bill of exceptions in the cause. Immediately following the petition and answer is shown "Bill of Exceptions." At the conclusion of the evidence as shown by the bill, there is this recital: "The court found for the plaintiff and against the defendant." There is no statement that judgment was rendered, but it is recited that defendant filed motion for new trial within 4 days after the rendition of verdict and judgment. This is the only reference in the entire abstract indicating that any judgment was ever rendered, and there is no recital at any place that the record of the court shows a judgment.
At the conclusion of the bill of exceptions follows the title, "Statement," under which is a very brief reference to the nature of the action, a controverted question over the name of a street, and that defendant denies there was a contract to improve it. It fails to give information of the material facts of the case without reference to the record, and fails to state the facts relevant to any issue on appeal. Following this is the headline "Points and Authorities," under which is another very brief statement of some of the contentions of appellant, but there is no assignment of error made in any manner, except the statement that "the finding and judgment in the lower court was for the wrong party."
It is obvious that the abstract in this case in so far as it purports to show essential record entries, is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on appeal. It is essential for the record to show that a judgment was rendered from which an appeal would lie;...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
O'Meara v. New York Life Ins. Co.
... ... Insurance Company, Respondent Court of Appeals of Missouri, Kansas City March 1, 1943 ... Appeal ... from Jackson Circuit ... App.), 80 S.W.2d 201; City of Huntsville ex rel ... Johnson v. Hamilton Estate (Mo. App.), 33 S.W.2d 185; ... ...
-
Huber v. Jones
... ... a trade or exchange of real estate theretofore made between ... plaintiff and certain of the defendants as ... Cox v. Orr, 322 Mo. 207, 209, 14 S.W.2d ... 440; Stroker v. City of St. Joseph, 316 Mo. 1090, ... 292 S.W. 1031; State ex rel. Davidson v ... committed. City of Huntsville ex rel. Johnson v. Hamilton ... Estate (Mo. App.) 33 S.W.2d 185 ... ...
-
Wright v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
...the judgment must be affirmed." To the same effect see McGuire v. Brokaw, Mo.App., 226 S.W. 581, and City of Huntsville ex rel. Johnson v. Hamilton Estate, Mo.App., 33 S.W.2d 185. No judgment is shown to have ever been entered. This too is fatal. Continental Insurance Company v. Hurst, 129 ......
-
Hines v. Bezler
...of determining any question arising upon exceptions. Le Clair v. Le Clair et al., Mo.App., 77 S.W.2d 862, 865; City of Huntsville v. Hamilton Estate, Mo. App., 33 S.W.2d 185, 186. The abstract filed by appellant must be complete enough to enable the court to review all errors and exceptions......