Case law

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.

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.

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.

Robb v. Wallace

371 S.W.2d 232 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Sep 9, 1963

Brown, (Mo.) 320 S.W.2d 493 , and Nickels v. Borgmeyer, (Mo.App.) 258 S.W.2d 267, 276 . … Highfill v. Brown, (Mo.) 340 S.W.2d 656 l. c. 663.

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.

State ex rel. Wright v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.

82 Mo. 683 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1884

This court held in Abbott v. Linden bower, 42 Mo. 167 , that “An assessment in the name of a *685 person who neither was, nor ever had been, the owner of the-property, would be an utterly void assessment.” … There was no evidence that the State board ever performed its duty with respect to the property of this company.

Baldwin v. Desgranges

355 Mo. 959 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jan 13, 1947

Overrun means the excess of board feet cut from a log over the log scale. … A cutback is a dock in board feet in a board for bad ends, overwidth or other defects, and a miscut is a board cut tapering, that is, thicker at one end than the other.

Bowman v. Standard Oil Company of Indiana

350 Mo. 958 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 25, 1943

Brown v. Alton Rd. Co. (Mo. App.), 151 S.W.2d 727 , 745[31-40]. Consult State ex rel. v. Shain (Banc), 346 Mo. 681 , 694[11, 12], 143 S.W.2d 233 , 240[16, 17]; Melenson v. … Bertha Christiansen was 51 years of age and was earning $85 a month in addition to room, board, and laundry. She was confined to a hospital for about fifty weeks. A bone graft was attempted.

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.

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.

Trimble v. Kansas City, Pittsburg & Gulf Railroad

180 Mo. 574 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 17, 1904

Assn., 149 Mo. 74 ; State Trust Company v. Railroad, 110 Fed. 10 .] But such is not the case here. … [Brown v. Brown, 124 Mo. 79 ; Dempsey v. Schawacker, 140 Mo. l. c. 690.] Interest is allowable under the statute on unliquidated claims from the date of demand. [Ryans v. Hospes, 167 Mo. 342 .]

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.

Cole v. Empire District Electric Co.

331 Mo. 824 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 20, 1932

The only other equipment on this board was the power meter which was fastened at or near the south end of the board. … Missouri Public Utilities Company v. Cox, 298 Mo. 427 , 250 S. W. 551 ; Wood v. Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Company, 351 Ky. 77 , 151 S. W. 29 ; National Fire Insurance Company v.

Bryant v. McCune

49 Mo. 546 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 15, 1872

The term “ dower” is sometimes applied to any interest in the estate of the husband given bylaw; and Judge Scott, in Hastings v. … (As to the implication spoken of, see Foster v. Cook, Brown’s Ch., Am. ed., 347 and notes; also 2Redf. Wills, 738-9, and cases cited.)

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.

Wiley v. Holmes

28 Mo. 286 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 15, 1859

(Winter v. Innes, 4 Mylne & Craig, 109.) … The case of Condee & Scribner v. Clark & Brown, 2 Mich. 255 , is unlike that before us. We understand that in this case the state of Michigan gave the law of the contract.

First National Bank v. American National Bank

173 Mo. 153 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 18, 1903

[Ashbury Railway Carriage & Iron Co. v. Riche, L. R. 7 H. L. 653; Attorney- *161 General v. Great Eastern Railway Company, 5 App. Cas. 473; Baroness Wenlock v. The River Dee Company, 10 App. Cas. 354; Trevor v. … [Thilmany v. Paper Bag Co., 108 Iowa 333 , and cases cited; Groos v. Brewster, 55 S. W. (Tex.) 590.] The rule is thus tersely stated in Bank v.