Case ID: mo_39/html/0417-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Fagg, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robert C. Bishop, Defendant in Error, v. Willys C. Ransom, Plaintiff in Error.
    
      Practice — Error—Motion for New Trial. — When a motion to set aside an execution is overruled, the party must make his motion for a new trial, and preserve the same in his hill of exceptions, before suing out his writ of error or taking his appeal. — Ante, Banks v. Lades, p. 406, and Bishop v. Ransom, p. 416.
    
    
      Error to Kansas City Common Pleas Court.
    
    
      J. D. Hines, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Douglass and Gage, for defendant in error.
    
      
      
         The contrary rule was declared in Parker et als. v. Waugh et als., 34 Mo. 340—cited and approved in Bruce v. Vogel, 38 Mo. 100. It was not the common law practice to file a motion for rehearing or new trial upon orders overruling motions filed after verdict.
    
   Fagg, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a proceeding to set aside a sale made in pursuance of an execution issued from the office of the clerk of the Kansas City Court of Common Pleas. The motion was overruled by the court, exceptions duly taken, and the case brought here by writ of error. There was no motion for a new trial, and this court will not undertake to review the error complained of. It was matter, of exception purely, and, according to the uniform opinion of this court, the necessity for making such a motion cannot be dispensed with.

The other judges concurring, the judgment is affirmed.