Leach v. G. F. Mosher Real Estate Co.

Decision Date06 July 1926
Docket NumberNo. 15737.,15737.
Citation286 S.W. 134
PartiesLEACH v. G. F. MOSHER REAL ESTATE CO.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Action by James A. Leach against the G. F. Mosher Real Estate Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Writ of error dismissed.

Burke & Kimpton and A. F. Smith, all of Kansas City, for plaintiff in error.

Jackson C. Stanton, of Kansas City, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

From an examination of the record filed herein by plaintiff in error we find that this is a suit upon an assigned account. There was a trial before the court without the aid of a jury, resulting in judgment against defendant in the sum of $120.42, and defendant brought the case here by writ of error.

Plaintiff in error has wholly failed to file any statement or brief as required by sections 1511 and 1479, R. S. 1919, and rules 15 and 16 of this court. The penalty for such failure is dismissal. Snyder v. Free, 102 Mo. 325, 14 S. W. 875; Halstead v. Stone, 147 Mo. 649, 653, 49 S. W. 850; rule 18 of this court.

The writ of error is dismissed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Gates v. Dr. Nichols' Sanatorium
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 16, 1932
  • Gates v. Dr. Nichols' Sanatorium
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 16, 1932
  • Kristanik v. Chevrolet Motor Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • September 15, 1931
    ... ... C. R. I. & P. v. Smith, 272 Mo. 446, 72 S.W. 692; Leach v ... Mosher, 286 S.W. 134; Swearingen v. Lora, 293 ... S.W. 133; State ... ...
  • Kristanik v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 21359.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • September 15, 1931
    ...181 S.W. 987; Harding v. Bedoll, 202 Mo. l.c. 629, 100 S.W. 638; State ex rel. C.R.I. & P. v. Smith, 272 Mo. 446, 72 S.W. 692; Leach v. Mosher, 286 S.W. 134; Swearingen v. Lora, 293 S.W. 133; State ex rel. Wallace v. Lincoln, 274 S.W. 677; Russow v. City of Rich Hill, 30 S.W. (2d) 983; Winc......
  • 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