Case Name: MARTIN vs. HAGAN
Court: Supreme Court of Missouri
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1844-01
Citations: 8 Mo. 505
Docket Number: 
Parties: MARTIN vs. HAGAN.
Judges: 
Reporter: Missouri Reports
Volume: 8
Pages: 505–505

Head Matter:
MARTIN vs. HAGAN.
The evidence in this cause not being preserved in a bill of exceptions, the judgment was affirmed.
ERROR to Monroe Circuit Court.
Kirtkey, for Defendant in Error.'
1. If defendant’s witnesses testified in the manner they are made to speak in the bill of exceptions, this Court can never discover that the circuit judge erred in his finding and judgments.
2. The amount in controversy being trifling in comparison to the costs that will be incurred in the further litigation of this suit, this Court will not disturb the judgment, unless the error be very clear and manifest.
S. The form of the judgment works no injury, and at all events was not complained of in the Circuit Court, and therefore no ground of reversal here.
4. The sufficiency of the assignment of the bond was not objected to below, and not mooted, and if insisted, it might have been shown that Wilkinson was the only living administrator, or some other sufficient reason proved to support that assignment.

Opinion:
Namon, /.,
delivered the opinion of the Court.
This cause is brought here by writ of error to the Circuit Court of Monroe county. It appears from the record, that Hagan brought suit against the appellant, Martin, before a justice of the peace, and recovered a judgment; that Martin appealed to the Circuit Court, where the ease was submitted without a jury, and Hagan again recovered a judgment for $17 and costs. There was a motion' for a new trial, which was overruled, and exceptions taken to the overruling of said motion; but the evidence at the trial was not preserved by bill of exceptions, though it is spread upon the record by the clerk. Under such circumstances, as the testimony is notproperly before this Court, we cannot see that any error was committed by the Circuit Court in overruling the motion of the plaintiff in error for a new trial, and the judgment of the Circuit Court is therefore aflirmed.