Norman v. Hooker

Decision Date31 January 1865
Citation35 Mo. 366
PartiesMOSES NORMAN, Respondent, v. BENJAMIN HOOKER, Appellant.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from Laclede Circuit Court.

T. A. Sherwood, for appellant.

BATES, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

Norman sued Hooker and Harrison upon a promissory note. They answered; two days afterward judgment by default was given against them. At the next term Hooker moved the court to set aside the judgment, because it was irregularly entered whilst the answer was undisposed of. At this term there was a new judge on the bench who had been of counsel in the case, and the bill of exceptions shows that the motion was overruled on the ground that the judge had been of counsel in the case. An entry made by the clerk on the record, shows that for the same reason the court refused to entertain the motion. Either disposition of the motion was wrong; the judgment should have been set aside, and if the judge upon the bench was, by reason of his former relation to the case, incompetent to sit in it, a change of venue should have been granted. No opinion is given, of course, as to the sufficiency of the answer which had been filed by the defendants.

The judgment of the Circuit Court in refusing the motion to set aside the original judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded to the Circuit Court, where the judgment by default will be set aside and the cause be proceeded with.

Judges Bay and Dryden concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Cross v. Gould
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 12, 1908
    ...and not disposed of has been determined to be an irregularity for which the judgment should be set aside at a subsequent term. Norman v. Hooker, 35 Mo. 366; Follett v. Alexander, 58 Ohio St. 202, 50 N. E. 720; Oliphant v. Whitney, 34 Cal. 25. See, also, 1 Black on Judgments (2d Ed.) 326. Re......
  • Cross v. Gould
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 12, 1908
    ...and not disposed of, has been determined to be an irregularity for which the judgment should be set aside at a subsequent term. [Norman v. Hooker, 35 Mo. 366; Follett v. Alexander, 58 Ohio St. 202, 50 N.E. Oliphant v. Whitney, 34 Cal. 25. See also 1 Black on Judgments (2 Ed.), 326.] Renderi......
  • Irwin v. Burgan
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 3, 1930
  • Irwin v. Burgan
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 3, 1930
  • 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