Case law

State Ex Rel. William R. Compton Co. v. Walter

324 Mo. 290 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 30, 1929

Markley, 52 Cal. 411 ; White v. Burkett, 21 N. E. (Ind.) 1087; Samis v. King, 40 Conn. 298 ; Mann v. City of LaMars, 109 Iowa, 251 , 80 N. W. 327 ; State ex rel. v. Hackmann, 277 Mo. 56, 63 ; Congregation v. … Barkwell v. Trimble, 309 Mo. 546 . 274 S. W. 683 , and City of Brunswick v. Scott, 275 S.

Baum v. City of St. Louis

343 Mo. 738 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 20, 1938

[Newsom v. Board of Supervisors (Cal. Sup.), 270 P. 676 ; Galvin v. Board of Supervisors, 195 Cal. 686 , 235 P. 450 . See, also, Hopping v. Council of City of Richmond, 170 Cal. 605 , 150 P. 977 ; Hyde v. … [See, also, Newsom et al. v. Board of Supervisors et al., 270 P. 676 .]

Hoelmer v. Heiskell

359 Mo. 236 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 13, 1949

Brown v. Hughes, 345 Mo. 958 , 137 S.W.2d 544 ; Brown v. Wilson, 348 Mo. 658 , 155 S.W.2d 176 . … Brown v. Hughes, supra; Brown v. Wilson, supra.

Boschert v. Eye

349 S.W.2d 64 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 10, 1961

See Brown v. Moore, supra, 248 S.W.2d 558, 559 ; Hufft v. Kuhn, Mo., 277 S.W.2d 552 . Cf. Spica v. McDonald, Mo., 334 S.W.2d 365, 369 [3]. In Taylor v. St. … It therefore appears under the law of Brown v. Moore, supra, and Taylor v. St.

Dudley v. Agniel

207 S.W.3d 617 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 5, 2006

Following the rationale of State ex rel Nixon v. … Nixon v.

Hudgins v. Mooresville Consolidated School District

312 Mo. 1 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 22, 1925

Wahl v. … The cases of Strother v. Kansas City, 283 Mo. 283 , Harrington v. Hopkins, 288 Mo. 1 , and Jacobs v.

Standard Operations, Inc. v. Montague

758 S.W.2d 442 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 18, 1988

Louis Browns unsuccessfully tried to eject the formidable Cardinals from historic Sportsman’s Park. … Pollard v. Board of Police Commissioners, 665 S.W.2d 333 (Mo. banc 1984), cert, denied 473 U.S. 907 , 105 S.Ct. 3534 , 87 L.Ed.2d 657 (1985). 4 . Pollard, 665 S.W.2d at 341, fn. 12 . 5 .United Cal Bank v.

State Ex Rel. Dalton Ex Rel. Stonum v. Reorganized District No. II

307 S.W.2d 501 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 9, 1957

Norwood v. Norwood, 353 Mo. 548 , 183 S.W.2d 118, 122 . Respondents cite Hixson v. … While the recital may have been admissible as a statement against the interest of the Ray County Board (Simmons v.

Vogt v. Wurmb

318 Mo. 471 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 7, 1927

[Main v. Lehman, 294 Mo. 579 , 243 S. W. 91 ; Mullen v. Sensenbrenner Merc. Co., 260 S. W. 982 ; Welch v. McAllister, 15 Mo. App. 492 ; Donaldson v. Wilson, 60 Mich. 86 ; Calvert v. … Springfield Light Co., 231 Ill. 290 ; Bennett v. Railroad, 102 U. S. 577 ; 20 R. C. L. 56, par. 52.]

Smith v. Travelers Protective Ass'n of America

319 Mo. 1120 · Supreme Court of Missouri · May 18, 1928

V. … [Courtois v. Grand Lodge, 135 Cal. 552 ; Overhiser v. Overhiser, 14 Colo. App. 1 ; Farra v. Braman, 171 Ind. 529 ; White v. Brotherhood, 124 Iowa 293 ; Brown v. Ancient Order, 208 Pa. 101 ; Snyder v.

City of Richmond Heights v. BD. OF EQUALIZATION OF ST. LOUIS CTY.

586 S.W.2d 338 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Sep 11, 1979

V, § 18 in Lalumondier and in St. … V, § 18, and § 536.150, and concluded: “We do not think that the right, if any, of relator [school district to seek review by certiorari of an alleged un-derassessment by the county board of equalization] in this case is

May Department Stores Co. v. State Tax Commission

308 S.W.2d 748 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jan 13, 1958

State Board of Equalization, 64 Mo. 294 ; State ex rel. St. Louis County v. Evans, 346 Mo. 209 , 139 S.W .2d 967; State ex rel. Young v. F. W. Woolworth Co., 348 Mo. 1180 , 159 S.W.2d 297, 299 . … Mandamus has occasionally been employed, but usually to enforce the orders of the Commission or State Board. State ex rel. Thompson v. Dirckx, 321 Mo. 345 , 11 S.W.2d 38 ; Huidekoper v.

Leahey v. Cass Avenue & Fair Grounds Railway Co.

97 Mo. 165 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1888

The defendant’s evidence tends to show that this and another boy by the name of Brown were .together on the street; that Brown jumped on the step to the front platform, and, in answer to a question of the driver, said he … State v. Brown, 64 Mo. 371 ; State v. Sneed, 88 Mo. 138 . 3. Jessop, the driver, was a witness for defendant.

Wolff v. Wohlien

32 Mo. 124 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 15, 1862

But the appellants object to Wilson v. … It is true the case of Wilson v.

McNamara v. St. Louis Transit Co.

66 L.R.A. 486 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 20, 1904

On the day in question about half past three p. m. he boarded defendant’s car at thirteenth and Olive streets, intending to go to Jefferson avenue, as a passenger on the car, having the money to pay his fare. … Jones, 51 Mo. 316 ; Graham v. Railroad, 66 Mo. 536 ; Seibel v. Siemon, 72 Mo. 526 ; Bruce v. Ulery, 79 Mo. 322 ; Brown v. Plank Road Co., 89 Mo. 152 ; Welsh v. Stewart, 31 Mo. App. 376 ; Prueitt v.

State ex rel. Johnston v. Lutz

136 Mo. 633 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 23, 1896

to issue it because that question is, under the statute, within the judgment and discretion of the board to determine (State ex rel. v. … Gregory, 83 Mo. 123 ; State ex rel. v. State Med. Examining Board, 32 Minn. 324 ; The People ex rel. v.

Finney v. Cist

34 Mo. 303 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1863

The complaint showed that the plaintiff, on the 21st of June, 1849,'leased to one Brown, for the term of ten years from that date, a lot of ground in the city of St. … (Ridgly v. Stillwell, 28 Mo. 400 .) That this may be a hard case of oppression by the landlord, cannot affect the legal question involved. The lessee has his remedy in another form of action.

Mills v. Federal Soldiers Home of Missouri

549 S.W.2d 862 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 11, 1977

V, sec. 5, Mo.Const. In Taylor v. … Section 536.010(3); Morrell v. Harris, 418 S.W.2d 20 (Mo.1967); Moore v. Damos, 489 S.W.2d 465 (Mo.App.1972); Sc ism v. Long, 280 S.W.2d 481 (Mo.App.1955).

State v. Rushing

935 S.W.2d 30 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 19, 1996

Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. at 742 , 103 S.Ct. at 1543 (plurality opinion); State v. Hornbeck, 492 S.W.2d at 802, 805 (Mo.1973). … See Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. at 742-43 , 103 S.Ct. at 1543-44 (plurality opinion). The facts recited above would lead a reasonable person to believe that drugs were present in the container felt by Officer Price.

Hess Warming & Ventilating Co. v. Burlington Grain Elevator Co.

280 Mo. 163 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 4, 1919

[Milan Milling Co. v. Gorten, 93 Tenn. 590 ; Flint Walling Mfg. Co. v. McDonald, 21 S.E. 526 .]" To same effect are York Mfg. Co. v. Colley, 247 U.S. 21 ; Browning v. Waycross, 233 U.S. 21 . … V.