Jones v. Steele

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtWAGNER
Citation36 Mo. 324
PartiesJOHN J. H. JONES, Plaintiff in Error, v. JAMES M. STEELE, Defendant in Error.
Decision Date31 October 1865

36 Mo. 324

JOHN J. H. JONES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
JAMES M. STEELE, Defendant in Error.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1865.


[36 Mo. 325]

Error to Louisiana Court of Common Pleas.

Dyer, for defendant in error.

Campbell & Hesser, for plaintiff in error.

Though it may be true that at the time of suit brought the plaintiff had not complied with the provisions of the statute, yet the defendant could not take advantage of the omission or defect by motion in arrest. The objection was not taken at the proper time and in the proper way. (Woods et al. v. The State of Mo., 10 Mo. 698.) The defendant should have raised that issue by plea in abatement or answer, and that is the only way it could be done. (Schermerhorn v. Jenkins, 7 Johns. 373.) A defendant cannot move in arrest for anything which might have been pleaded in abatement. (2 Black. 1120.)


WAGNER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiff, who is a minor, brought his suit in the Louisiana Court of Common Pleas against the defendant, and obtained a verdict in his favor. In the caption of his petition he purported to sue by his next friend; the defendant filed his answer to the merits, and went to trial. After the rendition of the verdict by the jury, the defendant moved the court to arrest the judgment, because no next friend had been appointed for the plaintiff by the clerk or the court, as required by statute. The plaintiff then presented his petition to the court, praying the appointment of a next friend (he same person who purported to act as such in the caption of the petition) accompanied with the written acceptance and bond of the proposed ext friend.

The court overruled the application and declined to make the appointment, and then arrested the judgment.

The first error assigned in this cause is the action of the court in sustaining the motion in arrest of judgment, and the second is refusing the application of plaintiff to have a next friend appointed. The defect in the petition was apparent upon its face; the caption forms no part of it.

[36 Mo. 326]

To have made it regular, there should have been a substantive averment or allegation that an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 practice notes
  • Jones v. Peterson, No. 31809.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 17, 1934
    ...and the objection that the petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Sec. 774, R.S. 1929; Jones v. Steel, 36 Mo. 324; Elfrank v. Seiler, 54 Mo. 134; Paddock v. Somes, 102 Mo. 226; Temple Co. v. Young, 179 Mo. App. 278. An objection to a petition in equity on ......
  • Mabe v. Gille Mfg. Co., No. 15219.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 9, 1925
    ...but will. impose a duty on the Court to appoint a guardian to represent him. Cochran v. Thomas, 131 Mo. 275, 33 S. W. 6; Jones v. Steele, 36 Mo. 324; Holton v. Towner, 81 Mo. This court said in Hanlin v. Meat Co., 174 Mo. App. 462, loc. cit. 466, 160 S. W. 547, 548: "Following these ca......
  • Burns v. Wilson
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • February 14, 1876
    ...& McGinnis and William Hensley, for respondent, cited: Dowzelot v. Rawlings, 58 Mo. 75; DeGraw v. Prior, 53 Mo. 313; Jones v. Steele, 36 Mo. 324; Montgomery v. Tipton, 1 Mo. 446. LEWIS, J., delivered the opinion of the court. Plaintiff, an infant under fourteen years of age, sues for da......
  • Concerned Parents v. Caruthersville School Dist. 18, No. 59626
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 11, 1977
    ...interests of their minor children. 3 See State ex rel. Missouri Pac. R. R. v. Cox, 306 Mo. 27, 267 S.W. 382 (banc 1924); Jones v. Steele, 36 Mo. 324 (1865); Baker v. Mardis, 221 Mo.App. 1185, 1 S.W.2d 223 (1928). In any event, the adult plaintiffs are entitled to maintain the suit on their ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
17 cases
  • Jones v. Peterson, No. 31809.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 17, 1934
    ...and the objection that the petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Sec. 774, R.S. 1929; Jones v. Steel, 36 Mo. 324; Elfrank v. Seiler, 54 Mo. 134; Paddock v. Somes, 102 Mo. 226; Temple Co. v. Young, 179 Mo. App. 278. An objection to a petition in equity on ......
  • Mabe v. Gille Mfg. Co., No. 15219.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 9, 1925
    ...but will. impose a duty on the Court to appoint a guardian to represent him. Cochran v. Thomas, 131 Mo. 275, 33 S. W. 6; Jones v. Steele, 36 Mo. 324; Holton v. Towner, 81 Mo. This court said in Hanlin v. Meat Co., 174 Mo. App. 462, loc. cit. 466, 160 S. W. 547, 548: "Following these ca......
  • Burns v. Wilson
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • February 14, 1876
    ...& McGinnis and William Hensley, for respondent, cited: Dowzelot v. Rawlings, 58 Mo. 75; DeGraw v. Prior, 53 Mo. 313; Jones v. Steele, 36 Mo. 324; Montgomery v. Tipton, 1 Mo. 446. LEWIS, J., delivered the opinion of the court. Plaintiff, an infant under fourteen years of age, sues for da......
  • Concerned Parents v. Caruthersville School Dist. 18, No. 59626
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 11, 1977
    ...interests of their minor children. 3 See State ex rel. Missouri Pac. R. R. v. Cox, 306 Mo. 27, 267 S.W. 382 (banc 1924); Jones v. Steele, 36 Mo. 324 (1865); Baker v. Mardis, 221 Mo.App. 1185, 1 S.W.2d 223 (1928). In any event, the adult plaintiffs are entitled to maintain the suit on their ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT