Case law

Smith v. Gregory

75 Mo. 121 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1881

Beecham v. Smith, E. B. & E. 442. To the same effect are Winter v. White, 1 Brod. & Bing. 350; Bedford v. Benton, 1 Bing. (N. C.) 399; Leake on Cont., 440. … Smith v. Oldham, 5 Mo. 483 ; Canefox v. Anderson, 22 Mo. 343 . The defendant Brown made no defense to the action — was a witness in the cause — does not join in this appeal, and is not here complaining of this judgment.

Heitz v. City of St. Louis

110 Mo. 618 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 20, 1892

Rose v. St. Charles, 49 Mo. 509 ; Baker v. Vanderburg, 99 Mo. 378 . … Brown v. Stark, 83 Cal. 636 ; Hicklin v. McClear, 18 Or. 126 ; Harrison Co. v. Seal, 5 S. Rep. 622. II.

Burgess v. St. Louis County Railroad

99 Mo. 496 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1889

D., 1875, Joseph Brown, William Marsh Kasson, and others, were directors of said ‘The St. … Landrum v. Union Bank, 63 Mo. 48 ; Bliss v. Pritchard, 67 Mo. 181 . Sullivan v. Railroad, 94 U. S. 806 ; Twin Lick Oil Co. v. Marbury, 91 U. S. 591 ; Badger v. Badger, 2 Wall. 94; Adams’ *509 Eq. 227; Kline v.

Fisher v. Patton

134 Mo. 32 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 31, 1896

Brown, J. A. Anderson, T. N. Lavelock, W. M. Allison, and John T. … V. It is also claimed by respondent that plaintiff is not the real party in interest, in that, as disclosed by the petition, his stock in the association was pledged as collateral for a loan.

State ex rel. Whalen v. Plater

280 Mo. 496 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 2, 1920

There was no settlement with relator by the city, as in the case of Calbreath v. Moberly, 80 Mo. 484 , nor settlement and compromise, as in the-case of McNulty v. Kansas City, 198 S. W. 186 , relied on by respondent. … Brown and Ragland, CC., concur. PER CURIAM: — The foregoing opinion of Small, C, is adopted as the opinion of the court. All of the judges concur, except Goode, J., not sitting.

State Ex Rel. Howard Electric Cooperative v. Riney

490 S.W.2d 1 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jan 8, 1973

Co. v. … Danciger v. Public Service Commission, 275 Mo. 483 , 205 S.W. 36 ; State ex rel. Lohman & Farmers’ Mutual Telephone Co. v. Brown, Public Service Commission, 323 Mo. 818 , 19 S.W.2d 1048 ; State ex rel. Cirese v.

State v. Green

305 S.W.2d 863 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 14, 1957

See also State v. … State v. Jones, Mo., 221 S.W.2d 137 ; State v. Sherry, Mo., 64 S.W.2d 238 ; State v. Vinson, Mo., 107 S.W.2d 16 ; State v. Thomas, Mo., 82 S.W.2d 885 ; State v. Brown, Mo., 245 S.W.2d 866 .

Warnecke v. State Tax Commission

340 S.W.2d 615 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 2, 1960

Louis Board of Equalization affirming the assessment on Warnecke’s real estate located in St. Louis and known as the Paul Brown Building. … In Minnesota Valley Canning Co. v.

Baugh v. Grigsby

286 S.W.2d 798 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 13, 1956

Cullen v. Johnson, 325 Mo. 253, 271 , 29 S.W.2d 39, 46 . … See Jordan v.

Hargis v. Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Railway Co.

100 Mo. 210 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1889

Railroad v. Cochran, 3 Lea (Tenn.) 482; Prather v. Tel. Co., 89 Ind. 501 ; Day v. Railroad, 20 Am. & Eng. R. R. Cas. 359. … In the case of Campbell v.

Zeitinger v. Hargadine-Mckittrick Dry Goods Co.

298 Mo. 461 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 28, 1923

The general trend of the decisions on this subject will be found reported in notes to Brown v. Saul, a Louisiana case, 16 Am. Dec. 177 , and to Walker v. Sanders, a Minnesota case, 123 Am. St. 280. … [O’Day v. Conn, 131 Mo. 321 ; Gray v. Meddle, 80 Mo. 39 ; Boyce v. Howell, 210 S. W. (Mo.

Horton v. Clark

316 Mo. 770 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 15, 1927

[State v. State Board of Medical Examiners, 34 Minn. 387 .] For other cases announcing the same general doctrine see: Meffert v. Medical Board, 66 Kan. 710 ; People v. Hasbrouck, 11 Utah, 219 ; Dent v. … West Virginia, supra; State v. Webster, 150 Ind. 607 ; Freeman v. Board of Medical Examiners, 154 Pac. (Okla.) 56; State Medical Board v. McCrary, 95 Ark. 511 ; State ex rel. Hurwitz v. North, 70 U. S. (L. Ed.) 496.

Bogy v. Shoab

13 Mo. 365 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 15, 1850

White v. Patten, 24 Pick. 324 ; Comstock v. Smith, 13 Pick. 116 ; Jackson v. Bradford, 4 Wend. 622 ; Jackson v. Hubbell, 6 Cowen, 613; Dart v. Dart, 7 Conn. R. 256; Chew v. Barnett, 11 Serg. & Rawle, 389 . … Brown v. Jackson, 9 Wheat. 452 . Nor would it be in accordance with the manifest intent of such conveyance, that after acquired title should pass.

Straughan v. Meyers

268 Mo. 580 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 18, 1916

W. 566 ; State ex rel. v. Blaisdell, 119 N. W. 360 ; State v. Custer, 66 Atl. 306 ; Gillespie v. Palmer, 20 Wis. 544 ; Davis v. Brown, 34 S. E. 839 .] … [Glaser v. Rothschild, 221 Mo. l. c. 210.] Counsel for appellant urge that the doctrine announced in Bowers v. Smith, 111 Mo. 45 ; Hehl v. Guion, 155 Mo. 76 ; and Gass v.

Finnegan v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.

261 Mo. 481 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 13, 1914

[Yost v. Railroad, 245 Mo. l. c. 246; Shimp v. Stove Co., 173 Mo. App. l. c. 433; Lowe v. Railroad, 89 Iowa, l. c. 427; Haynes v. Railroad, 143 N. C. 154 , 9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 972.] … [Combs v. Rountree Cons. Co., 205 Mo. 367 ; Ridenour v. Mines Co., 164 Mo. App. l. c. 592.]

Campbell v. Pope

96 Mo. 468 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1888

So in Keiley v. … On the other hand, in the case of Coffee v. Tevis, 17 Cal. 239 ; Wheeler’s Estate, 1 Md. Ch. 80 ; Brown v. White, 5 Dutch. [N.

State v. Craft

299 Mo. 332 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 11, 1923

Brown and Rolla Nicholson. … C., 723, 725, 728; State v. Lawler, 130 Mo. l. c. 371; State v. Kennedy, 154 Mo. 268 ; James v. State, 53 Ala. 380 ; Clements v. State, 84 Ga. 660 ; State v. Calhoun, 72 Iowa, 432 ; Turner v.

St. Louis Gunning Advertising Co. v. City of St. Louis

235 Mo. 99 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 7, 1911

[State v. Addington, 12 Mo. App. l. c. 217; s. c., 77 Mo. 110 ; St. Louis v. Meyrose Mfg. Co., 139 Mo. 560 ; State v. Beattie, 16 Mo. App. l. c. 145; City of Chillicothe v. Brown, 38 Mo. … [Walker v. Cronin, 107 Mass. 555, 564 ; Chatfield v. Wilson, 28 Vt. 49 ; Phelps v. Nowlen, 72 N. Y. 39 ; Frazier v. Brown, 12 Ohio St. 294 ; Martin, B., in Rawstron v. Taylor, 11 Exch. 369, 378, 384. See Benjamin v.

Thrower Ex Rel. Lockhart v. Henwood

351 Mo. 663 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 6, 1943

Co. v. Doyle, 203 Ark. 1111 , 160 .S. W. (2d) 856, 858(5): Mo. Pac. Rd. Co. v. Eubanks, 200 Ark. 484 , 139 S. W. (2d) 413, 414 (3); Mo. Pac. Rd. Co. v. Ward, 195 Ark. 966, 971 , 115 S. ,W. (2d) 835, 837(4); Baldwin v. … Co. v. Sheppard, 194 Ark. 619 , 109 S. W. (2d) 109, 110 (3); DeQ. & E. Rd. Co. v. Pigue, 135 Ark. 499 ) 205 S. W. 888 ; L. R. & H., S. W. Rd; Co. v. McQueeney, 78 Ark. 22 , 92 S. W. 1120 . 3 Mo. Pac. Rd. Co. v.

Dickerson v. Chrisman

28 Mo. 134 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jan 15, 1859

(Benoist v. Darby, 12 Mo. 206 ; 2 Stark. 191; Muller v. Moss, 1 Maul. & Sel. 325.) There was however no necessity for such testimony in the cause, as the fact of notice was clearly established by other evidence. … The case of Davis v.