Hockaday v. Newsom
| Decision Date | 31 March 1871 |
| Citation | 48 Mo. 196 |
| Parties | JOHN A. HOCKADAY et al., Petitioners, v. HARVEY NEWSOM et al., Defendants.<sup>a1</sup> |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Petition for Prohibition.
John A. Hockaday, for petitioners.
H. C. Hayden, for defendants.
This is an application for a writ of prohibition to be issued against the defendants as justices of the County Court of Callaway county. The defendants appear, and make answer admitting the facts stated in the petition. There is no exemplification of the record of the proceedings of the County Court in the matter complained of. From the statements of the petition, admitted by the answer, it appears that the proceedings which the petitioners seek to restrain belong exclusively to the administrative and ministerial duties of the County Court, and do not involve any exercise of the jurisdiction of the court in its judicial capacity. In such case a prohibition will not be granted. This subject was fully considered in the case of West v. Clark County Court, 41 Mo. 44, and the decision in that case is decisive of this application.
Prohibition refused.
Judge Wagner concurs. Judge Fagg not sitting.
a1. This case was decided at the July term, 1868, and properly belongs with the cases of that term, reported in 42 Mo.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The State ex rel. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company v. Harty
...courts from proceeding in excess of their prescribed powers. [State ex rel v. Elkin, 130 Mo. 90, 30 S.W. 333, 31 S.W. 1037; Hockaday v. Newsom, 48 Mo. 196; State rel. v. Clark Co. Justices, 41 Mo. 44; Howard v. Pierce, 38 Mo. 296; Tetherow v. Grundy Co. Ct., 9 Mo. 121.] These bodies, while ......
-
The State ex rel. McEntee v. Bright
...195 U.S. 27; 1 Dillon on Munic. Corp. (4 Ed.), sec. 242, 244; State ex rel. v. Clark, 41 Mo. 44; Vitt v. Owens, 42 Mo. 512; Hockaday v. Newsom, 48 Mo. 196; Kalbfell Wood, 193 Mo. 675; State ex rel. v. Goodier, 195 Mo. 551; High, Ex. Leg. Rem. (3 Ed.), sec. 782; People v. Lake City Dist. Cou......
-
State ex rel. Verble v. Haupt
...1913, secs. 355, 356; State v. Clark County, 41 Mo. 44; Casby et al. v. Thompson, 42 Mo. 133; Vitt v. Owens et al., 42 Mo. 512; Hockaday v. Newsome, 48 Mo. 196; Higgins v. Talty et al., 157 Mo. 280; State rel. v. Police Commissioners, 16 Mo.App. 48; Bailey on Habeas Corpus, secs. 362, 364; ......
-
State ex rel. Laclede Bank v. Lewis
...will not lie to restrain its performance. Prohibition only lies to forbid judicial acts. State v. Clark Co., 41 Mo. 44; Hockaday v. Newsom, 48 Mo. 196; Vitt v. Owens, 42 Mo. 512; Casby v. Thompson, 42 Mo. 133; Thompson v. Tracy, 60 N. Y. 31. Even where courts act in a ministerial capacity, ......