Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

ROBERT PHILLIPS, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. DORMAN FRAZIER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant's motion for new trial was not ruled within 90 days after it was filed and per Rule 78.06, V.A.M.R., deemed denied on October 28, 1975. Appellant's notice of appeal was filed November 12, 1975.

The judgment became final on October 28 [Rule 81.05(a), V.A.M.R.] and the notice of appeal was not filed within the ten day period as provided in Rule 81.04, V.A.M.R.

The notice of appeal not having been timely filed, we have no jurisdiction and must dismiss the appeal. Perryman v. Perryman, 507 S.W.2d 671 (Mo.App. 1974). It is so ordered.

All concur.

HOGAN, J., not participating.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PHILLIPS v. FRAZIER
(May 12, 1976)