Case law

Davis v. Hartwig

195 Mo. 380 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 30, 1906

Moreover, it is conceded there is no evidence that Abraham Davis, the respondent, was a taxpayer of Buchanan county, and, therefore, the case does not come within the rule laid down in Newmeyer v. … J., Gantt, Burgess, V alii ant. arid Fox, JJ., concur; Marshall, J., concurs in all that is said, but *400 is further of the opinion that even if the hill charged that all of the acts alleged were impending as a threatened

State Ex Rel. Winkle Terra Cotta Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.

322 Mo. 121 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 2, 1929

In Hull v. Mass. Bonding Ins. … In Ruhe v. Buck, 124 Mo. 178 , 183, 27 S.W. 412 , Judge GANTT quoted approvingly from Scudder v.

Streeter v. Hundley

580 S.W.2d 283 · Supreme Court of Missouri · May 17, 1979

Kraus v. Board of Educ. of Jennings, 492 S.W.2d 783, 786 (Mo.1973); State ex rel. Beaty v. Randall, 79 Mo.App. 226 (1899); Deskins v. Gose, 85 Mo. 485 (1885); King v. Jefferson City School Board, 71 Mo. 628 (1880). … If such violations come within the terms of § 168.-221.3, RSMo 1969, the Board could have held him accountable. In Board of Education, Mt. Vernon Schools, Mt. Vernon v.

Whiteaker v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.

252 Mo. 438 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 24, 1913

[Lanning v. Railroad, 196 Mo. 1 . c. 656 et seq.; Stotler v. Railroad, 200 Mo. 1 . c. 117 et seq.; Johnson v. Railways, 203 Mo. 1 . c. 398 et seq.; State ex rel. v. … It is so ordered. . . *463 Graves, Brown, Bond and Faris, JJ., concur; Woodson and Walker, JJ., dissent, Woodson, J., in an opinion filed.

Elting v. Hickman

172 Mo. 237 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 24, 1903

In Lynch v. … [State ex rel. v. Wofford, 121 Mo. 61 ; State ex rel. v. Yancy, 123 Mo. 391 ; Spaulding v. Brady, 128 Mo. 653 ; State ex rel. v. Higgins, 125 Mo. 364 .]

Missourians to Protect the Initiative Process v. Blunt

799 S.W.2d 824 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 7, 1990

State v. Burns, 351 Mo. 163 , 172 S.W.2d 259, 266 (1943); Moore v. Brown, 350 Mo. 256 , 165 S.W.2d 657, 662 (banc 1942). … Moore v. Brown, 165 S.W.2d at 662 .

Preisler v. Hearnes

362 S.W.2d 552 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 11, 1962

Plaintiff mainly relies on Preisler v. Doherty, 365 Mo. 460 , 284 S.W.2d 427 (and cases therein cited), in which we held invalid a senatorial redistricting by the Board of Election Commissioners of the City of St. … Plaintiff also strongly relies on Brown v. Saunders, 159 Va. 28 , 166 S.E. 105 , in which a congressional redistricting was held invalid.

City of St. Louis v. Moore

269 Mo. 430 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 21, 1916

In 1894 the board of education of the city of St. … Y.) 332; McCullough v. Board of Education, 51 Cal. 418 ; In re Milwaukee Southern R. R., 124 Wis. 490 .

Britton v. School District of University City

328 Mo. 1185 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 20, 1931

Louis Safe Deposit Bank v. Kennett Est., 101 Mo. App. 370 , 74 S. W. 474 ; Spahr v. Cape, 143 Mo. App. 114 , 122 S. W. 379 ; Improvement Co. v. Strauch, 162 Mo. App. 76 , 149 S. W. 1159 ; Miller v. Klein, 177 Mo. … [Peters v. Buckner, 232 S. W. 1024, 1027 .]

State ex rel. Halpin v. Powers

68 Mo. 320 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1878

On appeal to the board of equalization of the city of St. … Lathrop v. Dowling, 50 Mo. 134 . The only question is, is there error in the record of the inferior tribunal brought before us by the writ ?

Tittman v. Green

108 Mo. 22 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1891

Citing Myers v. Wade, 6 Rand. 444 ; Swope v. Chambers, 2 Gratt. 319 . … In Gilmer v.

State v. Mischanko

272 S.W.2d 210 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 11, 1954

Brown informed the court and the defendant that he was withdrawing. “The Court: Mr. Brown, did you tell the man that you weren’t going to represent him? “Mr. … Betts v. Brady, supra; Foster v. People of State of Illinois, supra; Bute v. People of State of Illinois, supra; Skiba v. Kaiser, supra.

Leidy v. Taliaferro

260 S.W.2d 504 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 13, 1953

Brown, Douglas & Brown, R. A. Brown, Jr., St. Joseph, for respondent. BARRETT, Commissioner. On Tuesday, the 2nd day of August 1949, Thomas A. Leidy, Senior, and Thomas A. Leidy, Junior, were returning to St. … O'Brien v. Rindskopf, supra; Joyner v. Kimmell, supra; Foster v. Campbell, supra; Boroughf v. Schmidt, Mo.App., 259 S.W. 881 .

State Ex Rel. American Central Insurance v. Gehner

315 Mo. 1126 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 10, 1926

Co. v. St. Louis, 270 Mo. 40 ; State ex rel. Karrenbrock v. Trust Co., 209 Mo. l. c. 490; Carondelet v. Picot, 38 Mo. 130 .] … In a general sense this is true (State ex rel. v. Board of Equalization, 256 Mo. l. c. 463), but not, in the circumstances of this case, in the sense in which respondents employ the term.

State Ex Rel. Kahler v. State Tax Commission

393 S.W.2d 460 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Sep 13, 1965

This is an appeal by William V. … Stein v. State Tax Commission, supra. In State ex rel. Platz v.

Kalbfell v. Wood

193 Mo. 675 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 26, 1906

In Casey v. … [Lord v. Veazie, 8 How. 251 ; California v. Railroad, 149 U.

Emerick v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Co.

756 S.W.2d 513 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 26, 1988

Brown v. Meyer, 580 S.W.2d 533, 534 (Mo.App.1979). … Osborn v. Chandeysson Electric Co., 248 S.W.2d 657, 663 (Mo.1952); Brown v. Meyer, 580 S.W.2d 533, 534 (Mo.App.1979).

City of Caruthersville v. Huffman

262 Mo. 367 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 2, 1914

In construing plats of this character we must give effect to the plain meaning and intent they exhibit by their outlines as well as by their words, [Brown v. Carthage, 128 Mo. 13 , 23; Buschmann v. St. … The foregoing opinion of Brown, C., is adopted as the opinion of the court. All the judges concur.

State Ex Rel. Dreer v. Public School Retirement System

519 S.W.2d 290 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 10, 1975

See Hickey v. Board of Education of City of St. Louis, 363 Mo. 1039 , 256 S.W.2d 775 (1953). … See also 60 Am.Jur.2d 909, Pensions and Retirement Funds, § 39; Voigt v. Board of Education, 413 Ill. 233 , 108 N.E.2d 426 (1952). Appellant has cited several cases which deserve distinction. In State ex rel. Phillip v.

State ex rel. Murphy v. Stone

119 Mo. 668 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 5, 1894

See Washington County v. Railroad, supra; State ex rel. v. Severance, 55 Mo. 378 ; In matter of Apportionment of Taxes, 78 Mo. 596 ; State ex rel. v. Railroad, 92 Mo. 137 ; State ex rel. v. … In State ex rel. v.