Burden v. Hornsby
Charles Burden v. Leonidas Hornsby
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Bliss, Judge,
delivered the opinion of the court.
Suit was brought originally before a justice of the peace for killing plaintiff’s dog, and the damages were laid at $100. On motion to dismiss for excess of claim, the plaintiff amended his statement so as to make his claim but $50, and went to trial. This leave to amend is the first error complained of, but it was perfectly proper to make the correction. The defendant appealed, and upon trial the verdict was in his favor. The court, however, on the plaintiff’s motion, granted a new trial, and this is also claimed to be erroneous. It has long since been settled in Mis *239 souri that error will not lie for granting a new trial. The reasons are set forth in Helm v. Bassett, 9 Mo. 52 , and the doctrine is affirmed in Keating v. Bradford, 25 Mo. 86 . Upon the second trial the evidence was all submitted to the jury upon fair instructions, and the case should have stopped there. I find no error whatever in the record.
Judgment affirmed.
The other judges concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 8 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.