AMENDMENT TO RULES1 COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI Rules of Practice in the St. Louis Court of Appeals Rule 24 is hereby amended to read as follows: 126 S.W. "Rule 24.-ORAL ARGUMENTS. When a cause is called for argument, the appellant will make his statement and proceed with bis argument; the respondent will thereupon make his statement and proceed with his argument, the appellant replying, if he desires, and if he has not consumed all of his time in opening. The whole time consumed by either party in statement and argument shall not exceed sixty (60) minutes, unless the court, for cause shown, and on application made before the commencement of the argument in the case, shall otherwise order: Provided, however, that the court may, in its discretion shorten the time for argument in any case; and provided further, that in appeals in causes originating before a justice of the peace, the time for argument shall not exceed thirty (30) minutes on each side. Cross-appeals shall be treated as one cause, and the plaintiff in the trial court shall be entitled to open and close the argument. When two or more cases are heard together, the court, in its discretion, will allot the time to be given for argument. Unless by permission of the court, counsel will not read to the court in extenso the written or printed argument on file, nor from reports or text books. The above rule to be in force and effect on and after June 6, 1910. 1 For rule as previously adopted, see 123 S. W. v. SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 2 4. Upon refusal by this court of an appli- | in case one in which some new argument is cation for a writ of error, the clerk shall retain the application, together with the transcript and accompanying papers, for fifteen days from the day of the rendition of the judgment refusing the writ. At the end of which time, if no motion for a rehearing has been filed, or upon the overruling or the dismissal of such motion in case one has been filed, he shall transmit to the clerk of the Court of Civil Appeals to which the writ of error was sought to be sued out a certified copy of the orders of this court denying such application, and overruling the motion for rehearing, in case such motion has been filed; and shall return the file papers of that court to the clerk thereof, but shall not return the petition for the writ of error. A motion for a rehearing of an application is not a matter of right. But urged upon one or more points in the application, or some new authority is cited, is filed during the term in which the judgment refusing the application is rendered, it may be considered; provided it be confined to the new matter presented. Motions for rehearing of applications filed after the adjournment for the term can not be considered. The presentation of any point previously presented in the application, without urging some new argument or citing some new authority, will be deemed a sufficient ground for dismissing the motion. 7. Causes in this court will be regularly submitted on Wednesday of each week, though a case may be set down for submission upon another day by the permission or direction of the court. Amended March 15, 1906. 2 For rules as previously adopted, see 67 S. W. xi. CASES REPORTED Page .1002 Abeles, Bass v. (Mo. App.).... Abeles, Southwestern Telegraph & phone Co. v. (Ark.).. 724 336 730 A. B. Patterson & Co. v. Gulf, C. & 674 Civ. 954 A. G. Edwards & Sons Brokerage Co., Atwater v. (Mo. App.)... 823 A. J. Deer Co., Melvin v. (Tex. Civ. App.) 681 .1027 Allen, Floyd County v. (Ky.). ...... 571 .1035 968 622 815 Tele S. F. Altes, Busby v. (Mo. App.). American Car & Foundry Co., Panos v. (Mo. App.). Armor v. Frey (Mo.)... Armor v. Holly (Mo.). American Feed & Grocery Co., Pelican Assur. Co. v. (Tenn.). Anderson, Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. (Tex. Civ. App.).. Andrews, Reynolds & Co., Texas & P. R. Co. v. (Tex.)... Angelina County, Carter-Kelly Lumber Co. v. (Tex. Civ. App.).. Aquilla State Bank v. Knight (Tex. Civ. App.) Arkansas Retail Credit Men's Ass'n v. Lester (Ark.).... Arkansas Southwestern R. Co. v. Wingfield (Ark.) Arnett, Garrison v. (Tex. Civ. App.). Arnold v. Railway Steel Spring Co. (Mo. App.) 1085 928 562 Baker v. Metropolitan St. R. Co. (Mo. Ballard v. Bowie County (Tex. Civ. App.) Bank of Forrest City, Bank of Eastern Ar 293 893 712 76 483 495 611 795 366 589 Asher, Pace v. (Ky.). Ashley v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. v. Seeger (Tex. .1170 Athens Cotton Oil Co. v. Clark (Tex. Civ. App.) 322 323 Athens Cotton Oil Co. v. Harper (Tex. Civ. 823 Austin, Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. (Ky.).. 144 Axtell, Van Zandt-Moore Iron Works v. (Tex. Civ. App.).... 930 764 56 20 394 837 kansas v. (Ark.).. 837 Banner Rubber Co., Scheurer v. (Mo.)....1037 676 ... App.) (Mo. 516 (Mo. ..1198 755 Bass v. Abeles (Mo. App.).. Page ...1002 Beggs, School Dist. of Fredericktown ex rel. Fredericktown Lumber Co. v. (Mo. App.) Belcher v. Harr (Ark.).. Belden, Ball v. (Tex. Civ. App.). Bercher, Coleman v. (Ark.). 607 ..1070 .1007 Bevill, German Ins. Co. v. (Tex. Civ. App.) 31 229 235 236 ... Bigham Bros. v. Port Arthur Canal & Dock 324 .1064 429 828 Bland & Stratton, Southern R. Co. in Kentucky v. (Ky.).......... Blanton, Nunley v. (Tex.). .1198 .....1110 570 Blount v. State (Tex. Cr. App.).. Blythe, St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. (Ark.) 386 Boesch, Texas Cent. R. Co. v. (Tex.).. 530 ... Booth, King v. (Ark.). 700 830 Boppart v. Illinois Surety Co. (Mo. App.) 768 Bowen v. Kansas City (Mo. App.). 790 Bowie County, Ballard v. (Tex. Civ. App.) 56 Bowling v. Commonwealth (Ky.). 360 Boyman v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). .1142 Bradley Gin Co. v. J. L. Means Machinery Co. (Ark.).... Bradley Lumber Co. v. Miller & Daniels Branch, State v. (Mo. App.). Brandon, Texarkana & Ft. S. R. Co. v. Burke v. Trabue's Ex'x (Ky.) Burnitt, Easterwood v. (Tex. Civ. App.).. Burns, First Nat. Bank v. (Tex. Civ. App.) 532 714 20 24 392 79 8 663 Brauckman v. Hargadine-McKittrick Dry Breen v. Morehead (Tex. Civ. App.).... Brice, International & G. N. R. Co. v. Broom, McKinley v. (Ark.) 287 Browne v. Bentonville (Ark.). 81 98 793 521 703 552 791 424 650 58 613 391 927 125 934 333 34 968 80 Campbell, Gaither v. (Ark.). 524 ..1068 Carr, Miller v. (Ark.). 1182 .... 293 Carter, St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. (Ark.) 99 Caruthersville Hardware Co., Stout v. (Mo. .1199 Cassidy v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). (Ky.) .. Chappell v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). .1109 Chenault, Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. (Ky.)..1098 Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Austin (Ky.).. 144 Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Richards' Adm'r .1092 274 (Ky.) ..1105 Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., Matthews v. (Mo.) 1005 Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., Ray v. (Mo. App.) 543 Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., Seigfried v. (Mo. App.) 798 Chicago Mill & Lumber Co. v. Osceola 380 638 602 169 284 118 120 127 93 Chicago, R. I. & G. R. Co. v. Crenshaw ... Childs, Garth v. (Tex. Civ. App.).. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Sadieville Mill. Co. (Ky.). Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Silvers (Ky.) Citizens' Tel. Co. of Kentucky v. Wakefield (Ky.) City of Bentonville, Browne v. (Ark.). City of Houston v. Dupree (Tex.).. 236 .1115 58 989 495 City of St. Joseph, Sandy v. (Mo. App.).. City of St. Louis v. Warren Commission & 166 City of San Antonio v. Stevens (Tex. Civ. 666 Clark, Athens Cotton Oil Co. v. (Tex. Civ. 322 Clayton, State ex rel. Halsey v. (Mo.).... 506 63 Coffee, Chicago, R. I. & G. R. Co. v. (Tex. 638 253 729 619 916 .1070 .1019 Coffin v. German Fire Ins. Co. (Mo. App.) Cohen, Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. (Tex. Civ. Coleman v. Bercher (Ark.). 29 448 360 352 821 Continental Ins. Co. v. Johnson (Mo. App.) 966 Cooper, Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. (Ky.).. Cooper, Maxey v. (Ark.). Cope, Moots v. (Mo. App.). Corinth Woolen Mills v. Wabash R. Co. (Mo. App.)... 803 1030 Cornet v. Cabrillac (Mo.). .1079 Coryell, Gose v. (Tex. Civ. App.). .1164 Cosby, Equitable Life Assur. Soc. v. (Ky.) 142 13 ..1108 866 Couch v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). .......... ..... 111 842 862 771 Cox v. State (Tex. Cr. App.).. 602 243 915 700 Crowson, Mounce v. (Tex. Civ. App.).... 47 ... 106 842 26 .... 35 184 ... 987 886 Dallas Consol. Electric St. R. Co. v. Chase (Tex.) ....1109 384 Daniel, Allen v. (Ark.). 108 Daniel v. New Era Land Co. (Ky.). .1153 v. 218 470 863 Davis, State v. (Mo.).. Davis v. State (Tex. Cr. App.). 681 De La Garza, Holbein v. (Tex. Civ. App.) 42 332 Dillard, Edwin Schiele & Co. v. (Ark.).. 835 Dines, Alt v. (Mo.). .1035 Dixon, Bick v. (Mo. App.). Doke v. Trinity & B. V. R. Co. (Tex. Civ. .1195 Doniphan Lumber Co. v. Wenzel (Ark.).. 710 694 Dorroh-Kelly Mercantile Co., Orient Ins. Doss, Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. (Ky.). 358 834 616 349 994 29 871 .1131 |
Get this book in print
0 Reviews Reviews aren't verified, but Google checks for and removes fake content when it's identified Write review |