Rotchford v. Creamer
| Decision Date | 30 April 1877 |
| Citation | 65 Mo. 48 |
| Parties | ROTCHFORD v. CREAMER, APPELLANT. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court.--HON. GEO. A. MADILL, Judge.Matthew O'Reilley, for appellant, filed an argument elaborately discussing the exceptions to the referee's report.
Henry A. Clover, of counsel, for appellant.
Gottschalk for respondent.
I. This proceeding had for its object the settling and adjustment of the affairs of a co-partnership. By consent of parties the matters of difference were, by order of the court, submitted to a referee, who took testimony and made his report, which (with the exception of one modification which the court made of its own motion) was confirmed and judgment rendered for plaintiff, and this judgment the court in general term affirmed. We are precluded from any examination into the merits of the cause, because the motion for a new trial is not incorporated in the bill of exceptions. It is true that bill mentions the fact that the motion for a new trial was overruled; but what that motion was, or that it is even contained in the transcript, is not stated. Under all our previous rulings this defect is fatal.
II. In addition to that, the exceptions to the report of the referee, whereon the defendant relies for a reversal, are not incorporated in the bill of exceptions, nor so referred to in such bill as to designate and identify them. These reasons require an affirmance of the judgment.
All concur.
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fairgrieve v. City of Moberly
...Matlock v. Williams, 59 Mo. 105; Wetherall v. Harris, 51 Mo. 65; Brady v. Connelly, 52 Mo. 19; Carver v. Thornhill, 53 Mo. 283; Rotchford v. Cramer, 65 Mo. 48; Bollinger v. Carrier, 79 Mo. 318; Kimberlin Short, 24 Mo.App. 646; Hoffheimer v. Losen, 24 Mo.App. 653; Kauffman v. Harrington, 23 ......
-
Campbell v. Boyers
... ... exception and can only be reviewed when incorporated in a ... bill of exceptions. [Rotchford v. Creamer, 65 Mo ... 48; Turley v. Barnes, 131 Mo. 548, 33 S.W. 172; ... Meissner v. Ry. Equipment Co., 211 Mo. 112, 109 S.W ... 730; Bosley v ... ...
-
Campbell v. Boyers
...errors growing out of a reference are matters of exception and can only be reviewed when incorporated in a bill of exceptions. Rotchford v. Creamer, 65 Mo. 48; Turley v. Barnes, 131 Mo. 548, 33 S. W. 172; Meissuer v. Ry. Equipment Co., 211 Mo. 112, 109 S. W. 730; Bosley v. Cook, 85 Mo. App.......
-
Coy v. Landers
...the bill disclosed that such a motion was considered, overruled and an exception preserved to the order of the court thereon. [Rotchford v. Creamer, 65 Mo. 48; Stevenson Saline Co., 65 Mo. 425.] The statute was amended however in 1885 (See acts of 1885, p. 219) so as to authorize the consid......