Meyer v. Bobb
| Decision Date | 15 February 1916 |
| Docket Number | No. 18789.,18789. |
| Citation | 184 S.W. 105 |
| Parties | MEYER v. BOBB. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Leo S. Rassieur, Judge.
Action by Alfred C. F. Meyer against Clara P. Bobb. From an order denying new trial, the defendant appeals. Affirmed.
This is an appeal from the action of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis in entering judgment in favor of the plaintiff in conformity with the mandate of the St. Louis Court of Appeals in said cause. The history of this case, as we gather it from the briefs and record, is as follows:
The suit was originally instituted in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis to recover upon certain special tax bills which had been issued by the city of St. Louis against defendant's property. Trial was had in the circuit court, resulting in a judgment in favor of the defendant. Thereupon plaintiff was granted an appeal to the St. Louis Court of Appeals. The St. Louis Court of Appeals transferred the case to this court, on the ground that the title to real estate was involved. The appellant (on that appeal) filed a motion in this court, asking that the case be remanded to the Court of Appeals. This motion was sustained, and the cause was remanded to the St. Louis Court of Appeals, where an opinion was delivered (Meyer v. Bobb, 185 Mo. App. 685, 171 S. W. 600) reversing the judgment below and remanding the cause, with directions to the circuit court to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff. After the decision by the St. Louis Court of Appeals, the defendant Bobb applied to this court for a writ of certiorari for the purpose of reviewing and correcting the decision of the Court of Appeals. This application was denied by this court on January 22, 1915. On January 28, 1915, the respective parties appeared in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, in which court the mandate of the Court of Appeals had been filed, and plaintiff then moved the court to render judgment in his favor in compliance with the mandate of the Court of Appeals. The court sustained this motion and entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff in strict compliance with said mandate. Thereupon the defendant (appellant here) filed a motion for a new trial.
The principal grounds for a new trial, contained in the motion, were in substance as follows: That the ordinance authorizing the issuance of said tax bills and the judgment herein permitted the taking of defendant's property for public use in violation of sections 20 and 21 of article 2 of the Constitution of Missouri; that said ordinance and judgment herein deprived defendant of her property without due process of law, contrary to section 1. art. 14, of the Amendments of the Constitution of the United States and contrary to section 30, art. 2, of the Constitution of Missouri; that the St. Louis Court of Appeals, in directing judgment against defendant, deprived defendant of a trial by jury, and violated the amendment of 1884 of article 6 of the Constitution of Missouri, as well as section 28, art. 2, of said Constitution; that the judgment directed by said Court of Appeals is in excess of the amount asked for in the petition ; that the action of the Court of Appeals denied defendant the equal protection of the law, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. The motion for new trial was overruled, and defendant perfected an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barnes v. Boatmen's Nat. Bank of St. Louis
...Gary Realty Co. v. Swinney, 317 Mo. 687, 297 S.W. 43; Wise Coal Co. v. Columbia Zinc & Lead Co., 143 Mo.App. 587, 128 S.W. 232; Meyer v. Bobb, 184 S.W. 105; Aetna Ins. Co. Mo. Pac., 132 Mo.App. 608, 112 S.W. 31; Ward v. Haren, 183 Mo.App. 569, 167 S.W. 1064; Bagnell Timber Co. v. Railway Co......
-
Prasse v. Prasse
... ... the nature of the case may be disregarded. Sharkey v ... McDermott, 91 Mo. 657; Buck v. Meyer, 195 ... Mo.App. 287. (2) It is the absolute duty of the trial court, ... upon receiving a mandate of this court, to render such ... judgment as ... 1, 90 S.W. 1026; Viertel v ... Viertel, 212 Mo. 562, 111 S.W. 579; Keaton v ... Jorndt, 259 Mo. 179, 168 S.W. 734; Meyer v. Bobb ... (Mo.), 184 S.W. 105; Essey v. Bushakra, 304 Mo ... 231, 263 S.W. 405; Meyer v. Goldsmith (Mo.), 196 ... S.W. 745; Powell v. Bowen (Mo.), 240 ... ...
-
Marston v. Catterlin
... ... 179; Rees v. McDaniel, 131 Mo ... 681; State ex rel. Wattenbarger v. Lamb, 174 Mo.App ... 360; Ward v. Haren, 183 Mo.App. 569; Meyer v ... Bobb, 184 S.W. 105; Keltner v. Harris, 204 S.W ... (Mo. App.) 561. (2) The decision of the Supreme Court that ... plaintiff is entitled to ... ...
-
Prasse v. Prasse
...Railroad, 192 Mo. 1, 90 S.W. 1026; Viertel v. Viertel, 212 Mo. 562, 111 S.W. 579; Keaton v. Jorndt, 259 Mo. 179, 168 S.W. 734; Meyer v. Bobb (Mo.), 184 S.W. 105; Essey v. Bushakra, 304 Mo. 231, 263 S.W. 405; Meyer v. Goldsmith (Mo.), 196 S.W. 745; Powell v. Bowen (Mo.), 240 S.W. 1085; Gary ......