McMenamy v. Kampelmann
| Decision Date | 04 December 1919 |
| Docket Number | No. 21434.,21434. |
| Citation | 217 S.W. 99 |
| Parties | McMENAMY et al. v. KAMPELMANN et al. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Wilson A. Taylor, Judge.
Action by John McMenamy and others against Mathias Kampelmann and others. From. judgment rendered, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Otto F. Karbe and S. C. Rogers, both of St. Louis, for certain appellants.
F. X. Hiemenz, of St. Louis, for appellants Minnie Junior and Adolph Kampelmann. Marshall & Henderson, of St. Louis, for respondents.
The record in this case discloses that the matters at issue have heretofore been determined between the same parties upon the same facts as herein. 273 Mo. 450, 200 S. W. 1075. Upon the hearing in the instant case the trial court followed our rulings in the former case. It therefore follows that the judgment herein should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Crossno v. Terminal R. Ass'n of St. Louis
...908; North St. L. Gymnastic Soc. v. Hagerman, 232 Mo. 693; Mangold v. Bacon, 237 Mo. 496; Benton v. St. Louis, 248 Mo. 102; McMenamy v. Kampelmann, 217 S.W. 99; Coleman Northwestern Mut. Life Ins. Co., 233 S.W. 188; Scott v. Realty & Improvement Co., 255 Mo. 102; Armor v. Frey, 253 Mo. 464.......
-
Crossno v. Terminal Railroad Assn.
...908; North St. L. Gymnastic Soc. v. Hagerman, 232 Mo. 693; Mangold v. Bacon, 237 Mo. 496; Benton v. St. Louis, 248 Mo. 102; McMenamy v. Kampelmann, 217 S.W. 99; Coleman v. Northwestern Mut. Life Ins. Co., 233 S.W. 188; Scott v. Realty & Improvement Co., 255 Mo. 102; Armor v. Frey, 253 Mo. 4......
-
Lindman v. Altman
...Railroad, 250 Mo. 514, 520; Mahaney v. Railway, 254 S.W. 20; Frick v. Ins. Co., 233 S.W. 643; Lewis v. Barnes, 220 S.W. 487; McMenemy v. Kempelmann, 217 S.W. 99; Thompson v. Pennell, 199 S.W. 1011; Barrett Stoddard Co., 272 Mo. 129; Meyer v. Bobb, 184 Mo. 105. (6) Carroll had room on the si......
-
State v. Liolios
...first appeal constitutes the law of the case, and the trial court on a second trial should be controlled by such rulings. McMenamy v. Kampelmann (Mo. Sup.) 217 S. W. 99; Lewis v. Barnes (Mo. Sup.) 220 S. W. 487, loc. cit. 490. It is not suggested by appellant that the evidence on the last t......