Grimes v. Reynolds
JOHN M. GRIMES v. COURTLAND REYNOLDS, Administrator
Subsequent history: aff'd, Grimes v. Reynolds, 184 Mo. 679 (1904). (read from the later opinion; check before relying)
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.
BARCLAY, J.
This case in all essential particulars is identical with another of the same title, submitted to the court at the same time. But in this action the note given to plaintiff John M. Grimes, by his wife, Nancy M. Grimes, and sought to be established as a probate demand against her estate, was for the sum of $660, with interest at six per cent per annum from February 1, 1899, upon which the final judgment of allowance in the circuit court in May, 1901, was for $717.16, bearing interest at six per cent, to be compounded.
The plaintiff, in this case as in the other, prevailed in the trial court and defendant appealed. There is nothing else to distinguish this case from the other in which our views of the law applicable to the facts of both cases have been given.
Eor the reasons and upon the facts stated in the opinion of the St. Louis Court of Appeals in Grimes v. Reynolds, ad *590 ministrator, 94 Mo. App. (St. L.) 576, the judgment in the case at bar is affirmed, with the concurrence of Bland, P. J., and Goode, J., but because all the members of this court deem our said decision contrary to the previous decision of the Kansas City Court of Appeals in Lindsay v. Archibald, 65 Mo. App. (K. C.) Ill. it is ordered by this court (all the judges concurring) that this cause be certified and transferred to the Supreme Court in accordance with the terms of the Constitution of Missouri in such case made and provided.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 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.