Madkins v. Trice
| Decision Date | 31 October 1877 |
| Citation | 65 Mo. 656 |
| Parties | MADKINS v. TRICE, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Error to Macon Circuit Court.--HON. JOHN W. HENRY, Judge.
B. G. Barrow and J. L. Berry for plaintiff in error.
This was an action under the statute in relation to the claim and delivery of personal property, instituted before a justice of the peace. The affidavit of plaintiff omitted to state that the property claimed “had not been seized under any process, execution, or attachment against the property of the plaintiff.” On appeal to the circuit court, the affidavit was amended and the omission supplied. Since the trial of this cause by the circuit court, it has been expressly decided by this court in the case of Gist v. Loring, 60 Mo. 487, that such an amendment cannot be made after appeal to the circuit court. The judgment, which was for the plaintiff must therefore be reversed, and the suit be dismissed.
REVERSED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Union Brewing Company v. Ehlhardt
...cause had reached the circuit court. The following cases illustrate: Brashears v. Strock, 46 Mo. 221; Gist v. Loring, 60 Mo. 487; Madkins v. Trice, 65 Mo. 656. The ruling these cases was somewhat anomalous indeed, when we remember that it is the usual practice to permit amendments in cases ......
-
Union Brewing Co. v. Ehlhardt
...cause had reached the circuit court. The following cases illustrate: Brashears v. Strock, 46 Mo. 221; Gist v. Loring, 60 Mo. 487; Madkins v. Trice, 65 Mo. 656. The ruling of these cases was somewhat anomalous indeed, when we remember that it is the usual practice to permit amendments in cas......
-
Wagoner Undertaking Co. v. Jones
...not get jurisdiction and this cannot be supplied by amendment in the circuit court on appeal. Turner v. Bondalier, 31 Mo.App. 582; Madkins v. Trice, 65 Mo. 656; v. Loring, 60 Mo. 487; Haggard v. Railroad, 63 Mo. 302; Webb v. Tweedie, 30 Mo. 488; Johnson v. Fischer, 56 Mo.App. 553. (3) This ......
-
Mitchell v. Missouri Pacific Ry. Co.
...v. Railroad Co., 43 Mo. 196; Haggard v. Railroad Co., 63 Mo. 302; Webb v. Tweedle, 30 Mo. 488; Dillard v. Railroad Co., 58 Mo. 69; Madkins v. Trice, 65 Mo. 656; Huff v. Shepard, 58 Mo. 242. Nor can the amendment be justified on the theory that it was authorized by Revised Statutes, section ......