Case law

Wages v. Quincy, Omaha & Kansas City Railroad

110 Mo. App. 230 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 6, 1905

It is not so decided in the cases of Ferris v. Railroad, 30 Mo. App. 122 , and Board v. Railroad, 36 Mo. App. 151 , or the other cases cited by defendant. The syllabus in the Board case is somewhat misleading. … The judgment was manifestly for the right party (Brown v. Railroad, 78 S. W. Rep. 273 ) and is affirmed. All concur.

Cochran v. Wilson

287 Mo. 210 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 7, 1921

O’Connell v. Board, 112 Mo. l. c. 218.] Speaking of school districts generally, we said in the later case of State ex rel. School District v. … [Shull v. Railroad, 221 Mo. l. c. 146; Harrison v. Lakenan, 189 Mo. 581 ; Brown v. Globe Pr. Co., 112 S. W. 462 .]

Gunn v. United Railways Co.

270 Mo. 517 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 30, 1917

We cite Haldan v. Great Western Ry. Co., 30 U. C. C. P. (Canada) 89; Browne v. Railroad, 108 N. C. 34 ; Hunter v. Railroad, 126 N. Y. 18 ; Tobin v. Railroad, 211 Pa. St. 457; Damont v. Railroad, 9 La. … [See also Newmark v. Railroad, 111 N. Y. Supp. 379 ; Johnson v. Railroad, 70 Pa. 357 ; Gavett v. Railroad, 82 Mass. 501 , l. c. 507; Cousins v. Railroad, 96 Mich. 386 .] Direction to Board Moving Car. III.

Hamra v. Magna Group, Inc.

956 S.W.2d 934 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Dec 8, 1997

He served as a member of both boards until 1991. Landmark established a deferred compensation plan for board members in 1985. … Brown, 42 Ct.Cl, 534, 206 U.S. 240 , 27 S.Ct. 620 , 51 L.Ed. 1046 (1907), “[W]hatever the consequences, we must accept the plain meaning of plain words.” 206 U.S. at 244 , 27 S.Ct. at 621 .

State v. Jacob

260 S.W.2d 22 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 13, 1953

The fundamental error of appellants' contention is demonstrated in the case of Brown v. Weare, 348 Mo. 135 , 152 S.W.2d 649 , 136 A.L.R. 286 . … Brown v. Weare, 348 Mo. 135 , 152 S.W.2d 649 . Respondent claims no more. The judgment of the trial court should be and is affirmed. All concur.

Hayes v. WDL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

343 S.W.3d 719 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 2011

See Gamble v. Browning, 277 S.W.3d 723, 729-30 (Mo.App. W.D.2008) (stating a denial of summary judgment is not reviewable even if it is an appeal from a- final judgment except in limited circumstances); Stotts v. … Defendants rely on Rice v.

Forrester v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

116 Mo. App. 37 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jan 8, 1906

The plaintiff, who was shown to be seventy-seven years old, attempted to board a car at the in *40 tersection of Fifteenth street and Sidney avenue. … [Browning v. Railroad, 124 Mo. 71 .] Much of the criticism of instruction numbered 1 for plaintiff finds its answer in what we have said concerning the evidence and pleading as to the stopping *43 of the car.

Plato Reorganized School District No. R-5 of Texas v. Intercounty Electric Cooperative Ass'n

425 S.W.2d 914 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 8, 1968

See Carter v. … Gibbs v. General Motors Corp., 350 Mo. 431 , loc. cit. 442, 166 S.W.2d 575 . See also 38 Am.Jur., p. 996, sec. 300; Brown v. St. Louis County Gas Co., Mo.App., 131 S.W.2d 354 , 359.

State ex rel. Crow v. City of St. Louis

169 Mo. 31 · Supreme Court of Missouri · May 21, 1902

[Brown v. Turner, 113 Mo. 27 ; Lowenberg v. Bernd, 47 Mo. 297 ; Goodman v. Railroad, 45 Mo. 33 ; Hines v. Ament, 43 Mo. 298 .] … [Lynch v. Murphy, 119 Mo. 163 ; State ex rel. v. Miller, 100 Mo. 439 ; City of Hannibal v. County of Marion, 69 Mo. 571 ; Cooley on Con.

State ex rel. Barker v. Wurdeman

254 Mo. 561 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 10, 1914

[State ex rel. v. Broaddus, 245 Mo. 123, 135 ; State ex rel. v. Dobson, 135 Mo. 1, 19 .] A like rule prevails elsewhere. [Ex parte Montgomery, In re Knox, 64 Ala. 463 ; McLaren v. Brown, 34 Ga. 583 .] … J., and Brown and Bond, JJ., dissent.

Archambault v. Blanchard

198 Mo. 384 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 3, 1906

[McFadin v. Catron, 138 Mo. 227 ; Hamon v. Hamon, 180 Mo. 685 ; State ex rel v. Guinotte, 156 Mo. 520 ; Crossan v. Crossan, 169 Mo. 631 .] … [Story v. Story, 188 Mo. 110 ; Catholic University v. O’Brien, 181 Mo. 68 ; Hamon v. Hamon, 180 Mo. 685 ; Crowson v. Crowson, 172 Mo. 691 ; Wood v. Carpenter, 166 Mo. 465 ; Kischman v. Scott, 166 Mo. 214 ; Riggin v.

Anderson v. Lebedun

782 S.W.2d 648 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 23, 1989

Guntli v. McLeod, 646 S.W.2d 899, 901 (Mo.App.1983). The court may not substitute its own judgment of the facts unless the Board’s judgment is unsupported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. … Kunz v. Personnel Advisory Board, 740 S.W.2d 395, 397 (Mo.App.1987); Bell v. Bd. of Educ. of City of St. Louis, 711 S.W.2d 950, 955 (Mo.App.1986); Section 536.140.

State ex rel. Purdy Reorganized School District No. II v. Snider

470 S.W.2d 805 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Aug 2, 1971

No appeal was taken from the decision of the board of arbitrators. … Browning v. City of Poplar Bluff, Mo.App., 370 S.W.2d 179, 182 . *809 It is elementary, of course, that mandamus does not issue where the right sought to be enforced is doubtful. State ex rel. Phillip v.

Burke v. City of St. Louis

349 S.W.2d 930 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 9, 1961

Hiltner v. Kansas City, supra, 293 S.W.2d 422 [3-5]; Gillen v. City of St. Louis, Mo., 345 S.W.2d 69, 73 [2]; Brown v. City of Craig, 350 Mo. 836 , 168 S.W.2d 1080 [3,4]. … Clain v. City of Burlington, 2 Cir., 202 F.2d 532 [2] ; Dean v. Board of Trustees of Soldiers and Sailors Memorial Bldg., 65 Ohio App. 362 , 29 N.E.2d 910 ; Annotation, 47 A.L.R.2d 544 ; Brown v.

F. Berg & Co. v. Strother

207 Mo. App. 45 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 1921

[Chadwick v. Chadwick, 115 Mo. 581, 586 .] “. . . … [Estes v. Hamilton Brown Shoe Co., 54 Mo. App. 543, 551 .] There is no question but that there was- mutuality in reference to the charging of this item to Hart’s/account.

In Re Sidebottom's Estate

327 S.W.2d 270 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 13, 1959

Brown v. Fidelity Union Trust Co., 126 N.J.Eq. 406, 9 A.2d 311 , loc. cit. 330. … Fitterling, 342 Mo. 299 , 114 S.W.2d 1004 , Citizens' Bank of Lancaster v. Foglesong, 326 Mo. 581 , 31 S.W.2d 778 , and Cook v.

Benton v. Scott

168 Mo. 378 · Supreme Court of Missouri · May 2, 1902

Brown and W. W. Major as tellers to distribute and collect the ballots for one director for the next ensiling three years. … This court in State ex rel. v.

State v. Vernor

522 S.W.2d 312 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 1975

State v. Brown, 502 S.W.2d 295 [5, 6] (Mo.1973); State v. Harris, 477 S.W.2d 42, 46 [6] (Mo.1972). The requirements under MAI-CR are more stringent than under § 546.230. … For the same reasons excusing literal compliance with § 546.230 in State v. Brown, supra, we find the error harmless in this case. Judgment affirmed. SMITH, C. J., and ALDEN A. STOCK-ARD, Special Judge, concur.

McLaran v. Crescent Planing Mill Co.

117 Mo. App. 40 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 1906

Corp., sec. 2206; Cook on Corp., sec. 539; Wright v. Warren, 4 De Gex Rep. 367; Browne v. Collins, 12 Eq. 586; Ibotson v. Elam, 1 Eq. 186; Jacques v. Chamber, 2 Collyer 435.] … East Hampton Rubber Thread Co., 158 Mass. 84 , is cited and relied upon by appellant as authority for the action of the board of directors in rescinding the dividend, in that case it appears that the *51 board of directors

City of Independence v. Gates

110 Mo. 374 · Supreme Court of Missouri · May 31, 1892

Levee Co. v. Hardin, 27 Mo. 496 ; Palmyra v. Morton, 25 Mo. 593 ; Sheehan v. Hospital, 50 Mo. 155 ; St. Louis v. Allen, 53 Mo. 44 ; Keith v. Bingham, 100 Mo. 300 . … Diggins v. Brown, 76 Cal. 318 ; Rentz v. Detroit, 48 Mich. 544 ; City of Kansas v. Baird, 98 Mo. 215 ; Desty on Taxation, pp. 29, 30.