Case law

State v. McGee

361 Mo. 309 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 13, 1950

See State v. Jackson; State v. Sapp; State v. Hardy, all supra. Defendant’s attack on these decisions is new and novel. … We have a Penal Board, we have a State Board of Probation and Parole and, of course, we have a Governor who has the right to pardon or commute any sentence.

State v. Blakemore

226 Mo. 560 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 15, 1910

[State v. Wissing, 187 Mo. 96 ; State v. Shour, 196 Mo. 202 ; State v. Gebhardt, 219 Mo. 708 ; State v. Lipscomb, 160 Mo. 125 ; State v. Larew, 191 Mo. 192 .] … In that case the charge was embezzlement of money belonging to Brown & Son. It was held that it was not necessary for the indictment to set out the kind of business in which the copartnership of Brown & Son was engaged.

State ex rel. Gracy v. Bank of Neosho

120 Mo. 161 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 13, 1894

Smith v. Chenault, 48 Tex. 455 ; Goodgion v. Gilreath, 32 S. C. 388. … S. 1879, sec. 6719; Meyer v. Rosenblatt, 78 Mo. 495 ; Potosi v. Casey, 27 Mo. 372 , and other cases.

State ex inf. Attorney General v. Shull

887 S.W.2d 397 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 22, 1994

On July 11,1991, the commissioners decided to fill Clay County vacancies on the Board of Trustees of the Clay-Platte-Ray Mental Health Tax Levy Board. … Whittle argued that only the school board had the “right to name or appoint” a teacher and that that power did not reside in Whittle as an individual member of the board.

Arnold v. School District

78 Mo. 226 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 15, 1883

It will be observed that to render a dismissal valid, it had to receive the sanction of the township board of education. … While the law was in this condition Judge Wagner, in McCutchen v.

Cooper v. Davis

310 Mo. 629 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 9, 1925

[Easley v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 113 Mo. 236 .] … [Buesching v. St. Louis Gaslight Co., 73 Mo. 219 ; Goltz v. Griswold, 113 Mo. 144 .]

Tucker v. State

481 S.W.2d 10 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 12, 1972

State v. Wilkinson, Mo., 423 S.W.2d 693 ; Gaitan v. State, Mo., 464 S.W.2d 33 ; State v. Cook, Mo., 440 S.W.2d 461 ; State v. Worley, Mo., 371 S.W.2d 221 ; State v. Brown, Mo., 461 S.W.2d 743 ; United States v. … State v. Brown, Mo., 449 S.W.2d 664 ; Hamby v. State, Mo., 454 S.W.2d 894 . The record in this case, the stipulation that Mr.

State Ex Rel. Kelsey v. Smith

335 Mo. 1125 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 31, 1934

S. 1899; State v. Brown, 130 Mo. App. 214 , 109 S. W. 99 ; State ex rel. Doran v. Johnson County Court, 138 Mo. App. 427, 429 , 122 S. W. 316 .] *1128 However, as we said in Russell v. Croy, 164 Mo. 69, 91 , 63 S. … In State v. Brown, 130 Mo. App. 214 , 109 S. W. 99 , decided in 1908, the St.

St. Louis, Keokuk & Northwestern Railroad v. Clark

119 Mo. 357 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 23, 1893

Cremor v. Nelson, 23 Cal. 464 ; Browning v. Railroad, 3 Green Ch. 47; Mettler v. Railroad, 25 N. J. Eq. 214; Redmond v. Railroad, 33 Ib. 165; Mercer, etc., Railroad v. Railroad, 26 Ib. 464; Johnson v. Railroad, 17 Atl. … See, also, to the same effect, Kanne v. Railroad, 30 Minn. 423 ; Railroad v. Piel, 87 Ky. 267 ; Pearson v. Johnson, 54 Miss. 259 ; Faust v.

Ex parte Craig

130 Mo. 590 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 19, 1895

S. 1889), the construction that had been given it previous to the decision of Stephens v. Brown. The mere filing of a motion for a new trial will not operate per se to stay the issuance of an execution. … Craig v.

In Re Wilson

391 S.W.2d 914 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 14, 1965

Clark, et al., v. … Clark, et al., v.

Lampkin v. Harzfeld's

407 S.W.2d 894 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 14, 1966

Mitchell, Tex.Civ.App., 27 S.W.2d 600 ; Alewine v. Tobin Quarries, 206 S.C. 103 , 33 S.E.2d 81 ; Smith v. Brown Paper Mill Co., La.App., 152 So. 700 ; Suniland Toys and Juvenile Furniture, Inc. v. … Brown Paper Mill Co., supra; Suniland Toys and Juvenile Furniture, Inc. v. Karns, supra.

Ranney v. Baeder

50 Mo. 600 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1872

In The State, etc., v. … In the case of Marsh v.

Bruun v. Katz Drug Company, Inc.

351 Mo. 731 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 7, 1943

The court found the filing of the suggestion of dissolution and the names of the last board of directors of the corporation. … Watkins v. Mayer, supra; Arnold v. Streek, supra; Yerxa, Andrews & Thurston v. Viviano, supra.

Saint Louis Univ. v. Masonic Temple Ass'n of St. Louis

220 S.W.3d 721 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 17, 2007

Support for SLU’s arguments that it is not controlled by a religious sect is shown by the fact that it is controlled and operated by this independent, lay Board of Trustees. See, e.g., Americans United v. … United v.

State v. Hatfield

72 Mo. 518 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1880

The court did not err in declining to issue attachments, as prayed for by defendant, for witnesses Brown and Conn, inasmuch as it appeared to the court that if issued they could not have been served at that term of the court … State v. Miller, 67 Mo. 604 . IY.

State v. Jones

427 S.W.3d 191 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 15, 2014

Simmons, 944 S.W.2d 165, 177 (Mo. banc 1997) (quoting Brown and declining to grant plain error review regarding admission of testimony); State v. … Clemons, 946 S.W.2d 206, 224 (Mo. banc 1997) (quoting Brown and declining to grant plain error review over all claims not objected to at trial or not raised in a motion for new trial); State v.

State v. Errington

355 S.W.2d 952 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 12, 1962

Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners v. Fife, 162 La. 681 , 111 So. 58 , 54 A.L.R. 594 , affirmed 274 U.S. 720 , 47 S.Ct. 590 , 71 L.Ed. 1324 ; Hitchcock v. … Watson v. State of Maryland, 218 U.S. 173 , 30 S.Ct. 644 , 54 L.Ed. 987 ; Semler v. Oregon State Board of Dental Examiners, supra; Parks v. State, 159 Ind. 211 , 64 N.E. 862 ; Hitchcock v. Collenberg, supra.

Auldridge v. Spraggin

349 Mo. 858 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 3, 1942

[Brown v. Weare, 348 Mo. 135 , 152 S. W. (2d) 649 .] Plaintiffs’-petition asks equitable relief and both'’parties have treated this as a suit in-equity: We shall treat it as such. [Rhodus v. … In’the case before us continuity of possession of the entire enclosed area has been maintained, and the'other elements of adverse possession as announced in Welsh v. Brown, 339 Mo. 235 , 96 S.

Mountain Grove Bank v. Douglas County

146 Mo. 42 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 15, 1898

Butler v. Van Wyck, 1 Hill. 462; Leavitt v. Blatchford, 17 N. Y. 533 ; Pratt v. Brown, 3 Wis. 609 ; Callender’s Adm’r v. Ins. Co., 23 Pa. St. 474; State v. Silvers, 47 N. W. Rep. 772 . … Taylor v. Ypsilanti, 105 U. S. l. c. 71-72; Greene Co. v. Conness, 109 U. S. 104 .