Ruggles v. Cnty. of Washington

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtM'GIRK
Citation3 Mo. 496
Decision Date31 October 1834
PartiesRUGGLES v. THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON.
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
8 practice notes
  • Kansas City v. Halvorson, No. 38611.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 6, 1943
    ...(2d) 593; Darrow v. Briggs, 261 Mo. 244, 169 S.W. 118; Rositzky v. Rositzky, 329 Mo. 662, 46 S.W. (2d) 591; Ruggles v. Washington County, 3 Mo. 496; Chalnda v. St. L. Transit Co., 213 Mo. 244, 112 S.W. 249; State ex rel. v. Burney, 269 Mo. 602, 191 S.W. 981; Seegers v. Marx-Haas Co., 334 Mo......
  • State ex Inf. McKittrick v. Koon, No. 39040.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 21, 1947
    ...227; St. Louis Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Walter, 329 Mo. 715, 46 S.W. (2d) 166; Walker v. Hassler, 240 S.W. 257; Ruggles v. Washington County, 3 Mo. 496; Special Commissioner's conclusion of law, sec. 4, pp. 67-9. (10) The following actions on the part of the respondents constituted "doing......
  • Stratman v. Norge Co. of Mo., No. 19298.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • January 9, 1939
    ...v. Ritchey, 68 Mo. 114. (12) A principal may recognize his authority ex post facto and make the act his own. Ruggles v. Washington County, 3 Mo. 496; Wade v. Goldsberry, 17 Mo. 270. Ratification is the election of one to accept an act or a contract previously done or entered into in his beh......
  • Werth v. City of Springfield
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • April 20, 1886
    ...833, 837, and especially 841 on p. 646; 1 Dillon Mun. Corp. (2 Ed.) sect. 385, p. 478, and sect. 386 and note 1; Ruggles v. Washington Co., 3 Mo. 496; Hunt v. Boonville, 65 Mo. 620; Dooley v. Kansas City, 82 Mo. 444. The ordinance of January 12, 1880, relates back to the time the city made ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • Kansas City v. Halvorson, No. 38611.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 6, 1943
    ...(2d) 593; Darrow v. Briggs, 261 Mo. 244, 169 S.W. 118; Rositzky v. Rositzky, 329 Mo. 662, 46 S.W. (2d) 591; Ruggles v. Washington County, 3 Mo. 496; Chalnda v. St. L. Transit Co., 213 Mo. 244, 112 S.W. 249; State ex rel. v. Burney, 269 Mo. 602, 191 S.W. 981; Seegers v. Marx-Haas Co., 334 Mo......
  • State ex Inf. McKittrick v. Koon, No. 39040.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 21, 1947
    ...227; St. Louis Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Walter, 329 Mo. 715, 46 S.W. (2d) 166; Walker v. Hassler, 240 S.W. 257; Ruggles v. Washington County, 3 Mo. 496; Special Commissioner's conclusion of law, sec. 4, pp. 67-9. (10) The following actions on the part of the respondents constituted "doing......
  • Stratman v. Norge Co. of Mo., No. 19298.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • January 9, 1939
    ...v. Ritchey, 68 Mo. 114. (12) A principal may recognize his authority ex post facto and make the act his own. Ruggles v. Washington County, 3 Mo. 496; Wade v. Goldsberry, 17 Mo. 270. Ratification is the election of one to accept an act or a contract previously done or entered into in his beh......
  • Werth v. City of Springfield
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • April 20, 1886
    ...833, 837, and especially 841 on p. 646; 1 Dillon Mun. Corp. (2 Ed.) sect. 385, p. 478, and sect. 386 and note 1; Ruggles v. Washington Co., 3 Mo. 496; Hunt v. Boonville, 65 Mo. 620; Dooley v. Kansas City, 82 Mo. 444. The ordinance of January 12, 1880, relates back to the time the city made ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT