Case law

St. Joseph & Iowa Railroad v. Shambaugh

106 Mo. 557 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1891

City of Hopkins v. Railroad, 79 Mo. 100 ; Matter of Railroad, 72 N. Y. 245 . … Granby Mining Co. v. Richards, 95 Mo. 110 ; Hammett v. Railroad, 20 Ark. 204 ; Lyons v. Railroad, 32 Md. 18 .

State ex rel. Woodmansee v. Appelquist

687 S.W.2d 176 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 2, 1985

State v. Kraus, 530 S.W.2d 684, 685 (Mo. banc 1975). … the board and to its supervision.”

Bertram v. Peoples Railway Co.

154 Mo. 639 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 5, 1900

Bank v. Hatch, 98 Mo. 376 ; Walker v. City of Kansas, 99 Mo. 647 ; State v. Moore, 101 Mo. 316 .] The accident happened on June 29, 1893, and plaintiff testified that he would be sixty-eight years old in 1897. … [Chouquette v. Barada, 28 Mo. 491 ; St. L. K. & N. W. R’y Co. v. St. L. Union Stock Yards, 120 Mo. 541 .] This however is not an arbitrary rule, but like almost all other rules, there are exceptions to it.

Pettis v. St. Louis Public Service Co.

240 S.W.2d 909 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 11, 1951

See Hoffman v. Peerless White Lime Co., 317 Mo. 86 , 296 S.W. 764 ; Smithers v. Barker, 341 Mo. 1017 , 111 S.W.2d 47 ; Mooney v. Terminal R. Ass'n, 353 Mo. 1080 , 186 S.W.2d 450 . … Gieseking v. Litchfield & Madison Ry. Co., 344 Mo. 672 , 127 S.W.2d 700, 708 ; see also Orr v. Shell Oil Co., 352 Mo. 288 , 177 S.W.2d 608 ; Schaefer v. Transamerican Freight Lines, Mo.Sup., 173 S.W.2d 20 ; Cook v.

Sterrett v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

225 Mo. 99 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jan 4, 1910

Practically the same instruction was under re *112 view in Gardner v. Met. Street Ry. Co., recently banded down. … [Black v. Railroad, 217 Mo. 672 .] This she did not do.

Patterson Ex Rel. Patterson v. Gibson

287 S.W.2d 853 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 12, 1956

Two older boys watching him (one twelve and one fifteen) testified that as he neared the flooring the upper board “tipped over” or “tipped to the side,” and he fell and the board (as he fell) came back into its original position … We do not, however, consider this “bridge” of boards as an inherently dangerous instrumentality.

Spurr v. Spurr

285 Mo. 163 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 2, 1920

[Johnson v. Johnson, 170 Mo. l.c. 56.] … Brown and Small, CC., concur.

Cobe v. Lovan

193 Mo. 235 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 22, 1906

[Lovelace v. Pratt, 163 Mo. 70 ; see, also, State ex inf. v. Equitable Loan & Inv. Co., 142 Mo. l. c. 342.] (2) Appellant insists the case at bar is not on all-fours with Lovelace v. … Appellant contends that the Lovelace case is out of line with Schanewerk v. Hoberecht, 117 Mo. 22 , but we think not.

Local Union No. 124, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Pendergast

891 S.W.2d 417 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jan 24, 1995

Pentecostal Church of God v. Hughlett, 737 S.W.2d 728, 729 (Mo. banc 1987). … John Calvin Manor, Inc., v. Aylward, 517 S.W.2d 59, 63-64 (Mo.1974).

State v. Thompson

428 S.W.2d 742 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 10, 1968

In State v. … State v. Freyer, 330 Mo. 62 , 48 S.W.2d 894 ; State v. Pritchett, 327 Mo. 1143 , 39 S.W.2d 794 ; State v. Archer, Mo.Sup., 6 S.W.2d 912 .

State ex rel. Tolerton v. Gordon

236 Mo. 142 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 3, 1911

[State v. Etchman, 189 Mo. 648 ; State ex inf. v. Standard Oil Co., 218 Mo. 1 ; Coffey v. … The act in judgment was intended to secure a bipartisan election board and to that end provided that the three members of the board should be appointed by the Governor, but that one of the three so appointed should be a member

West Virginia Coal Co. v. City of St. Louis

324 Mo. 968 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 5, 1930

We think the nature of the duties of this board requires it to keep a record of its proceedings. [Larned v. Briscoe, 62 Mich. 393 .] … "V.

McEntee v. Halloran

391 S.W.2d 266 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 14, 1965

Tomlinson, et al. v. Kansas City, Missouri, et al., No. 51,086, and State ex rel. James S. Mining, et al., v. Ilus W. Davis, et al., No. 51,088, decided herewith. … Louis Union Trust Co. v. Sartorius, 350 Mo. 46 , 164 S.W.2d 356, 359 (5). However, the exercise of such power does not contemplate that the court should act as legal adviser of the trustees.

State v. Barr

340 Mo. 738 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 11, 1937

It was so used in State v. … [See State v. Lloyd (Mo.), 217 S.W. 26 ; State v. Ramsey, 82 Mo. 133 ; State v. Sneed, 88 Mo. 138 ; State v. Brown, 181 Mo. 192 , 211-213, 79 S.W. 1111 .]

State v. Goodwin

271 Mo. 73 · Supreme Court of Missouri · May 29, 1917

[State v. Lewis, 248 Mo. l. c. 508; State v. Swearengin, 269 Mo. 177 .] … [State v. Sharp, 233 Mo. l. c. 286; State v. Webb, 254 Mo. l. c. 434-5; State v. Pfeifer, 267 Mo. l. c. 31-2.]

Aurora Water Co. v. City of Aurora

129 Mo. 540 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 2, 1895

This principle was recognized and declared in State ex rel. v. Walbridge, supra; see, also, City v. Schoenbusch, *579 95 Mo. 618 . … State ex rel. v. Mead, supra; Barber Asphalt Pav. Co. v. Hunt, supra; Rutherford v. Hamilton, 97 Mo. 543 . d.

State Ex Rel. Burke v. Cervantes

423 S.W.2d 791 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 12, 1968

Compare City of Joplin v. … Scott v. Scearce, Mo.App., 303 S.W.2d 175 ).

Sidway v. Missouri Land & Live Stock Co.

187 Mo. 649 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 30, 1905

[Dempsey v. McNabb, 73 Md. 433 ; Hald v. Ard, 48 Pa. St. 22; Graham v. Stanton, 177 Mass. 321 ; Kinner v. Tschirpe, 54 Mo. App. 575 ; Miller v. Lash, 85 N. C. 51 ; Ennis v. … V.

Frago v. City of Irondale

364 Mo. 500 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jan 11, 1954

V, § 3, Const., 2 V.A.M.S.; Cooper v. School District of Kansas City, 362 Mo. 49 , 239 S.W.2d 509 . … Barkwell v.

State Ex Rel. Attorney-General v. Kansas City

310 Mo. 542 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 7, 1925

In Miami Co. v. … In Gabbert v. Ry.