McGuire v. Brokaw
| Decision Date | 13 December 1920 |
| Docket Number | No. 13567.,13567. |
| Citation | 226 S.W. 581 |
| Parties | McGUIRE v. BROKAW. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Cooper County; J. G. Slate, Judge.
"Not to be officially published."
Action by Morris S. McGuire against Paul Brokaw. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Appeal dismissed.
W. F. Johnson and Charles W. Journey, both of Boonville, for appellant.
W. V. Draffen, of Boonville, and Jeffries & Comm, of St. Louis, for respondent.
Plaintiff's action was instituted to recover damages alleged to have resulted to him by reason of a collision between his automobile and defendant's; it being charged that his automobile was partially wrecked and that he suffered personal injury. Defendant's answer was a denial and a counterclaim. The judgment in the trial court was for the defendant, and plaintiff appealed.
Defendant asks that the appeal be dismissed. What is presented as an abstract of the record proper contains a bare statement in these words, "The petition, omitting caption and signature, is as follows." Then what purports to be the petition is set out, and then it is stated that, "The answer, omitting caption and signature, is as follows." Then follows what purports to be an answer, and then it is stated that "the reply, omitting caption and signature, is as follows." These statements do not show that a petition or other pleading was ever filed. It does not identify a petition or other pleading with the case or the trial. Harding v. Bedoll, 202 Mo. 625, 630, 100 S. W. 638. There should be shown that there was record entry of the filing of the pleadings. 202 Mo. 634, 100 S. W. 638; Barnes v. Barnes, 149 Mo. App. 546, 131 S. W. 114.
The abstract of the record proper does not show that a trial was had. Immediately following the copy of the reply is the statement, "The jury returned their final verdict for defendant," etc. Whether there was a " trial on the pleading is left only to inference.
The appeal must be dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sylvester v. Armstrong
...Corp., 45 P.2d 1057; Scott v. Ward (Wyo.) 54 P.2d 805; Bank v. Smoot (Utah) 269 P. 518; Palmer v. Sackett (Colo.) 256 P. 1093; McGuire v. Brokaw (Mo.) 226 S.W. 581. The does not at any place set out the alleged libelous publication, and is insufficient in that respect. In re St. Clair's Est......
-
The State ex rel. Wallace State Bank v. Trimble
...the appeal. Sec. 1479, R. S. 1919; Rule 15 of Kansas City Court of Appeals; Barnes v. Barnes, 149 Mo.App. 546; McGuire v. Brokaw, 226 S.W. 581; Harding v. Bedoll, 202 Mo. 625; Cunningham v. School District, 215 S.W. 249. White, J. Woodson, David E. Blair, Ragland and Atwood, JJ., concur; Gr......
-
Woods v. Dowd
...Mo. 317. (3) The abstract of the plaintiff in error does not show the filing of a petition and hence a dismissal is required. McGuire v. Brokaw, 226 S.W. 581. C. Westhues and Bohling, CC., concur. OPINION COOLEY This case is here on writ of error. For convenience and brevity we shall refer ......
-
Woods v. Dowd
...(3) The abstract of the plaintiff in error does not show the filing of a petition and hence a dismissal is required. McGuire v. Brokaw, 226 S.W. 581. COOLEY, This case is here on writ of error. For convenience and brevity we shall refer to plaintiff in error as plaintiff and to defendants i......