Ashby v. Glasgow
Cases that cite this one
16 later published cases cite this decision.
- Weil v. Simmons (Mo. 1877)
- Donnell v. Vigus Quarries, Inc. (Mo. Ct. App. 1970)
- Woodward v. Woodward (Mo. Ct. App. 1900)
- Wyler v. Union Pacific Ry. Co. (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri 1898)
- Clowser v. Noland (Mo. Ct. App. 1897)
- Hall v. Lane (Mo. 1894)
- State ex rel. Klotz v. Ross (Mo. 1893)
- Martin v. St. Charles Tobacco Co. (Mo. Ct. App. 1893)
- Mann v. Warner (Mo. Ct. App. 1886)
- Megher v. Stewart (Mo. Ct. App. 1879)
- Wilson v. Boughton (Mo. 1872)
- Downing v. Still (Mo. 1869)
- Harbor v. Pacific Railroad (Mo. 1862)
- Brewer v. Dinwiddie (Mo. 1857)
- The Illinois (District Court, D. Michigan 1857)
- Hill v. City of St. Louis (Mo. 1855)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court, delivered by
Glasgow, and others, sued Ashby by petition in debt, on a note for seventy-four dollars and fifty-seven cents; judgment was recovered for the amount cf the note, with damages and costs. At a subsequent term of the court, a motion was made to set aside the judgment for costs entered against the defendant below, which motion was oveiruled. This is the errror assigned, for which a reversal of the judg- . mentis sought.
When a final judgment is- rendered in a cause, and that judgment is erroneous, it may, during the term at which it was rendered, be set aside for during a term all the pro-cee¿iugs are in the breast of. the court, and they may be altered or vacated as justice requires. , But when the term is Past> then the control of the court ceases, and no alteration amendment can be made,-but such as is authorised by the A statute of jeofails .and amendments. An error m the court, in rendering judgment, is not cured by the statute of jeofails, it can only be.corrected by appeal, or writ of error, But as the whole-record ismo.w before the court, and as.it aPPears ^iat cause was properly cognizable, before a justice of the-peace, the suit'haying been commenced before . amendatory .of .the.act, regulating justices courts, , approved February 16th, L841, judgment for costs,should . haye been entered against the plaintiff;.below. .Sep4th geo...
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.