Missouri Court of Appeals, 1888

Baird v. George

Baird v. George
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided April 24, 1888 · Peers, Rombauer
30 Mo. App. 505; 1888 Mo. App. LEXIS 300

Baird v. George

070rehearing

Peers, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court on motion for rehearing.

A motion for rehearing in this case is filed by appellants, based on the conduct of one of the attorneys for the respondent. Affidavits both in support of and against the motion are presented to the court, but as the-case was decided upon points different from that called to the attention of the court by the motion, we see no good reason why the points raised in the motion for rehearing should be commented upon. We will say that the judgment of the lower court has not been affirmed because the bill of exceptions has not been filed in time, but (1) because the motion for new trial has not been filed in time ; and (2) because no exceptions are brought here for review, regardless of the fact whether • a motion for new trial was filed in time or not, and we cannot very well see how these matters could be remedied by stipulation as to filing bill of exceptions.

*507If the conduct charged in the motion for rehearing is true, language cannot be found too strong to condemn, it, but as it affords in this case — for reasons above, — no-ground for rehearing, the motion will be overruled.

All concur.

Opinion of the Court

Rombauer, P. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The record in this cause is in such condition as to. present nothing for review. The cause was tried before the court sitting as a jury, on conflicting evidence, and: judgment was rendered in favor of defendant. No: exceptions to the admission of evidence are saved, and no instructions were asked or given. Judgment was-rendered January 8, 1887. The record recites that the-motion for new trial -vpas filed on the — day of March,. 1887, although the clerk’s endorsement shows it to have been filed June 8, 1887. As motions for new trial must be filed within four days after judgment, the motion thus filed was unwarranted in either event, and the-court committed no error in overruling it. The only-assignment of error filed in this court is that* the verdict is against the weight of evidence.

This statement shows that the only disposition we can make of the appeal is to affirm the judgment. So ordered.

All concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.