Royal v. Kansas City Western Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 01 December 1916
• Docket Number: No. 17908.,17908.
• Parties: ROYAL v. KANSAS CITY WESTERN RY. CO.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

190 S.W. 573

ROYAL v. KANSAS CITY WESTERN RY. CO.

No. 17908.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

December 1, 1916.

Motion to Set Aside Order Dismissing Appeal Denied December 20, 1916.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; T. J. Seehorn, Judge.

Suit by Charlotte E. Royal, executrix, against the Kansas City Western Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Appeal dismissed.

The respondent brought this suit against the appellant in the circuit court of Jackson county to recover the sum of $10,000 damages for the killing of her husband, through the alleged negligence of the said company. The judgment was for $10,000, in favor of the respondent, and the appellant appealed the cause to this court.

C. F. Hutchings and McCabe Moore, both of Kansas City, for appellant. Atwood & Hill, of Kansas City, for respondent.

WOODSON, J.

Rule 15 of this court (169 S. W. ix), prior to its amendment at the April term, 1916, which governs this case, in substance, provides that all briefs of the appellant shall be printed and shall contain, separate from the argument or discussion of the authorities, a statement in numerical order of the points relied on, together with a citation of authorities appropriate under each point. And any brief failing to comply with this rule may be dismissed by the court. The rule then provides for the assignment of error, etc.

In this case counsel for appellant has filed a pamphlet covering 103 printed pages, labeled, "Appellant's Statement, Brief and Argument." The first 12 pages of this volume consists of a summary of the original petition and the first and second amended petitions filed in the cause, and of the answer thereto, with the reply. Page 13 is headed by the word "Facts," and immediately following, and under the word "Facts," are the words "The Evidence." Then follows 36 pages of evidence, mostly in questions and answers. Page 52 is headed "Assignment and Specifications of Errors." Following this are 32 assignments of errors, covering 10 pages; and page 61 begins with the heading, "Argument." Then follows the argument interspersed with the citation of many authorities, all covering 42 pages, or the remainder of the pamphlet. This pamphlet contains no numerical statement of the points relied upon for a reversal of the judgment, and in fact no points whatever, nor the citation of authorities, as required by said rule. In other words, there is practically no statement of the case, and...