Case law

Davidson v. Schmidt

256 Mo. 18 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 3, 1914

BROWN, C. … This case has been followed in State ex rel. v. Hopkins, supra; Pleasant Hill v. Dasher, supra; Lackland v. Walker, 151 Mo. 210 ; St. Louis v. Hollrah, 175 Mo. 79 .

Grainger v. Still

187 Mo. 197 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 15, 1905

A. 343; Bowman v. Woods, 1 Greene (Iowa) 441; Patten v. Wiggin, 51 Me. 594 , 81 Am. Dec. 593 ; Hesse v. Knippel, 1 Mich. N. P. 109; Martin v. Courtney, 75 Minn. 255 , 77 N. W. 813 ; Corsi v. Maretzek, 4 E. D. Smith (N. … Martin v.

McCollum Ex Rel. Curator v. Winnwood Amusement Co.

332 Mo. 779 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 20, 1933

[Berberet v. Electric Park Amusement Co., 319 Mo. 275 , 281, 3 S.W.2d 1025 ; Steinke v. Palladium Amusement Co. (Mo. App.), 28 S.W.2d 440 .] … [Nephler v. Woodward, 200 Mo. 179 , 188, 98 S.W. 488 .] In speaking of that case in Berberet v.

Rankin v. Harper

23 Mo. 579 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1856

This is a new question here to some extent, although somewhat involved in the case of Howe & Wallace v. … (Per Brown, C. J., in Wait v. Day, 4 Denio, 442 .)

Central Bank v. Thayer

184 Mo. 61 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 16, 1904

St. 11; Wallace v. Bank, 89 Tenn. 630 ; Hughes v. Brown, 88 Tenn. 578 ; Allen v. Curtis, 26 Conn. 456 ; Ryan v. Railroad, 21 Kan. 365 ; Commissioners v. Reynold, 44 Ind. 509 ; Company v. Gibb, L. R. 5 H. L. 480.] … [Smith v. Ricords, 52 Mo. 581 ; Ricords v. Watkins, 56 Mo, 553; Buren v. Buren, 79 Mo. 542 ; Bent v. Priest, 86 Mo. 486 ; Landis v. Saxton, 105 Mo. 486 ; Loomis v. Railroad, 165 Mo. 469 ; Callan v.

Wilson v. Purl

133 Mo. 367 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 17, 1896

the lines Brown showed him; that he claimed the land under the quitclaim deed from Clark and Brown.” … Cook v. Farrah (1891) 105 Mo. 492 ; Allen v. Mansfield (1891) 108 Mo. 343 . The deed was admissible as color, at least. 2.

Wetmore v. Berger

354 Mo. 158 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 2, 1945

Smith v. Pettis County, 345 Mo. 839 , 136 S.W.2d 282 ; Weis v. Wanstrath (Mo. App.), 149 S.W.2d 442 . … Johnson v. McAboy et al., 350 Mo. 1086 , 169 S.W.2d 932 ; Mahurin et al. v. Tucker (Mo. Sup.), 161 S.W.2d 423 ; J.C. Nichols Inv. Co. v. Roorbach et al. (Mo. Sup.), 162 S.W.2d 274 ; Kennen et al. v.

State ex inf. Attorney-General v. Hogan

163 Mo. 43 · Supreme Court of Missouri · May 21, 1901

shares of the par value of one dollar each; that the same has been bona fide subscribed and all thereof actually paid up in lawful money of the United States, and is in the custody of the persons hereinafter named as the board … Atty., v. Berkeley, 140 Mo. 184 ; State ex inf. v. Vallins, 140 Mo. 523 ; Mechum’s Pub. Off., sec. 491; Tomlins Law Dic., tit. Quo.

Heman v. Britton

88 Mo. 549 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1885

On the same day and at the same meeting, the board made another order, or resolution, reciting the indemnity bond, and to save the said securities thereon from loss, ordered that eleven of the bonds of one thousand dollars … Gill v. Balis, 72 Mo. 424 ; Bartlett v. Drew, 57 N. Y. 587 ; Hastings v. Drew, 76 N. Y. 9 ; Sawyer v. *556 Hoag, 17 Wall. 610 .

Jones v. Brownlee

53 L.R.A. 445 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 26, 1901

And in a most luminous and exhaustive discussion of this whole subject in Johnson v. Brown et al, 13 W. … And to the same effect, Johnson v. Brown, 13 W. Va. 136 . With the exception of Ruohs v.

State Ex Rel. Cason v. Bond

495 S.W.2d 385 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 6, 1973

Jones v. … This fact was recognized by this Court in the case of Brown v.

Zumwalt v. Forbis

349 Mo. 752 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jun 3, 1942

In McFarland v. Brown (Mo.), 193 S. W. 800 , this Court declared: “It is claimed by respondents [plaintiffs] that there was no evidence of delivery of the deed. … [Scott v. Scott, 95 Mo. 300 , 8 S. W. 161 ; Pitts v. Sheriff, 108 Mo. 110 , 18 S. W. 1071 .] ” Appellants' cite for the first time Tyler v. Hall, 106 Mo. 313 , 17 S. W. 319 .

State v. Buxton

324 Mo. 78 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 11, 1929

In State v. … In State v.

City of St. Louis v. Lanigan

97 Mo. 175 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1888

Railroad v. Richardson, 45 Mo. 466 ; Railroad v. Campbell, 62 Mo. 585 . … Papin v. Massey, 27 Mo. 445 ; Mead v. Brown, 65 Mo. 552 .

St. Louis County v. City of Florissant

406 S.W.2d 281 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 11, 1966

The first is that in McConnell v. … Kansas City v.

State v. Rader

262 Mo. 117 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 24, 1914

I worked my grey horse and his brown horse after this feed.” … J., concurs in separate opinion; Brown, J., concurs in result. WALKER, P. J.

Franklin v. Hume Consolidated School District

271 Mo. 585 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 16, 1917

[Hehl v. Guion, 155 Mo. 76 .] … [Board of Education v. City of Winchester, 120 Ky. 591 ; City of Marion v. Haynes, 164 S. W. (Ky.) 79; Fowler v. City of Oakdale, 166 S. W. (Ky.) 195.] In Fox v. City of Seattle, 86 Pac.

State ex rel. Mispagel v. Angert

127 Mo. 456 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 12, 1895

[said] board of supervisors shall have, by resolution, ordered the assessment of a tax, the secretary of the board, under the seal of the district, shall cause a certified copy of said order to be transmitted to the clerk … City of Clinton to use v. Henry Co., 115 Mo. 557 , and cases cited. This has been the settled law in this state *463 ever since the decision in Neenan v. Smith, 50 Mo. 526 , decided in 1872, and St. Louis to use v.

Heinz v. Railroad Transfer Co.

82 Mo. 233 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 15, 1884

D'Aquila v. Lambert, 2 Edw. 77 S. C. … Buckley v. Furniss, 15 Wend. 137 ; Covell v. Hitchcock, 23 Wend. 611 ; Edwards v. Buwer, 2 N. & W. 375.

State Ex Rel. Gentry v. Montgomery

317 Mo. 811 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 11, 1927

Browning v. Kelly, 309 Mo. l. c. 472, 274 S. … W. 658 ; State v. Page, 57 Pac. l. c. 516; Miller v. State, 40 L. R. A. l. c. 112; 20 R. C. L. 579.] When this court reviewed the judgment of the .circuit court in the case of State v.