TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Lang v. Callaway

Lang v. Callaway, 35 S.W. 1138 (Mo. 1896)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Missouri · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 2, 1896
Judges
Atsttt, Burgess, Shek, Wood
Citations
35 S.W. 1138134 Mo. 4911896 Mo. LEXIS 208
Disposition
Transferred to Kansas city court of appeals.
Headnotes
Supreme Court: pbactice: jurisdiction: constitutional question. Where no constitutional question is involved in the determination of a eause, so far as appears from the record, the supreme court will have no jurisdiction of it upon that ground.
Summary
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court. — Hon. Howard Gray, Special Judge. There is nothing in the constitutional question raised. It is raised for the first time in this court. Courtiuright v. Crow, 44 Mo. App. 568.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Burgess

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Burgess, J.

This is an action of replevin begun in the circuit court of Jasper county for certain personal property described in the petition. The value of the property is alleged to be $250.

Plaintiff recovered judgment for the possession of the property, and $17.17 damages. From the judgment defendant appealed to the Kansas City court of appeals, and by that court the case was certified to this court, upon the ground, as appears from the certificate, of there being involved a constitutional question.

*492 No bill of exceptions was filed in the circuit court, nor was there a constitutional question raised in the trial court, and is only raised now by the simple assertion of counsel for defendant. If the court of appeals can be shorn of its jurisdiction in this way, there is nothing to prevent a capricious party to any action pending before it from resorting to the same method, and at any time by so doing have the Case certified to this court. No constitutional question being'involved, so far as appears from the record, it is ordered to be returned to the Kansas City court of appeals. Holland v. DePriest, 130 Mo. 89 .

G-atsttt, P. J., and Shek-wood, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1898: 11899: 11900: 11902: 21905: 21917: 11981: 118982026peak 1902 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Buchanan v. Kirkpatrick615 S.W.2d 6 (Mo. 1981)
  2. Parlin & Orendorff Co. v. Hord46 S.W. 753 (Mo. 1898)
  3. Potter v. Mobley194 S.W. 205 (Tex. App. 1917)
  4. State ex rel. Horton v. Bland85 S.W. 561 (Mo. 1905)
  5. Kreyling v. O'Reilly71 S.W. 372 (Mo. Ct. App. 1902)
  6. Town of Kirkwood v. Johnson50 S.W. 433 (Mo. 1899)

Most recent

  1. Buchanan v. Kirkpatrick615 S.W.2d 6 (Mo. 1981)
  2. Potter v. Mobley194 S.W. 205 (Tex. App. 1917)
  3. J. G. Hutchinson & Co. v. Morris Bros.89 S.W. 870 (Mo. 1905)
  4. State ex rel. Horton v. Bland85 S.W. 561 (Mo. 1905)
  5. Kreyling v. O'Reilly71 S.W. 372 (Mo. Ct. App. 1902)
  6. Cauble v. Craig69 S.W. 49 (Mo. Ct. App. 1902)

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.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Holland v. De Priest, 31 S.W. 928 (Mo. 1895) 7

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list