Case ID: mo-app_56/html/0320-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Ellison, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Harry Walker, Respondent, v. John C. Carrew, Appellant.
    Kansas City Court of Appeals,
    January 29, 1894.
    1. Justices’Court: appeal: knowledge not notice. On an appeal from the justices’ court, the fact that the appellee had actual knowledge of such appeal is not sufficient notice.
    
      
      Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. R. H. Field, Judge.
    Aeeikmed.
    
      B. C. JDurall for appellant.
    The plaintiff received notice as contemplated by the statute. Revised Statutes, 1889, sec. 6342; Page v. Railroad, 61 Mo. 78; Brewing Co. v. Hauesler, 11 Mo. App. 387. The evidence is conclusive that at the day of trial and thereafter, plaintiff and his attorney had knowledge of appeal. Attorney said he was glad case had been appealed. Plaintiff tried to compromise the case. This occurred at divers times and testified to by sundry individuals. A voluntary appearance for any purpose waives a written notice and gives the court jurisdiction. Brewing Co. v. Hauesler, supra. .
    
    
      J. M. Cole for respondent.
    Upon the first question the law of this state is well settled. If an appeal be not taken on day of trial in justices’ court, a written notice must be served by appellant upon appellee at least ten days before the first day of the term at which the case is to be determined. Revised Statutes, 1889, sec. 6342; 2 Mo. 25; 3 Mo. 53; 10 Mo. 513; 50 Mo. 403, 504; 61 Mo. 78.
   Ellison, J.

— This cause was begun before a justice of the peace where plaintiff had judgment. Defendant appealed to the circuit court, though he did not do so on the day of trial before the justice.

Plaintiff appeared in the circuit court for the purpose of his motion and moved that court to affirm the judgment, for the reason that the appellant had given no notice of the appeal as provided by law. This motion was sustained. Defendant seeks to reverse the action of the circuit court by showing that, as a matter of fact, plaintiff and his attorney knew that the appeal had been taken. This will not do; knowledge is not notice. The judgment is affirmed.

All concur.