St. Louis, K. & S. R. Co. v. Wear
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
Citation | 36 S.W. 357,135 Mo. 230 |
Decision Date | 15 June 1896 |
Parties | ST. LOUIS, K. & S. R. CO. et al. v. WEAR, Judge.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
4. On an ex parte application, without notice, an order was granted in vacation appointing a receiver for a going corporation, and providing that the corporation should appear at the next term of court, three months distant, and show cause why the receivership should not be continued. Held, that the order was in excess of the limitation of the power of appointment without notice, the final hearing not having been fixed within a reasonable time.
5. The proceedings being ex parte, the fact that no objection was made to the jurisdiction at the time the order was granted is not a bar to an application for a writ of prohibition.
6. A petition for the appointment of a receiver for a corporation showed that the corporate property had been transferred to an alleged new company, but such new company was not made a party to the petition. A receiver having been appointed, the officers having control of the property refused to surrender it, whereupon the court granted a writ directing the sheriff to place the receiver in possession, and to arrest for contempt the persons refusing to surrender possession. Held that, the new corporation and its officers not being parties to the proceedings, the court was without jurisdiction to grant the writ.
7. A refusal to obey an order of court granted without jurisdiction does not render the person so refusing liable for contempt.
8. Under Const. 1875, art. 12, § 17, providing that the manager of a railroad corporation shall not in any way control, or act as officer of, another railroad corporation operating a parallel or competing line, the president of a railroad company cannot act as receiver for a company operating a parallel or competing line. Sherwood, J., dissenting.
In banc. Application by the St. Louis, Kennett & Southern Railway Company and others for a writ of prohibition against Judge Wear, judge of the circuit court. Writ granted.
The proceeding before Judge Wear was upon a petition in which Mr. Kerfoot was named as plaintiff, and the "St. Louis, Kennett & Southern Railroad Company, a corporation, and Louis Houck, E. F. Blomeyer, L. B. Houck, Theophilus Besel, and E. S. McCarty, as directors in said railroad company, and the Pemiscot Railroad Company, a corporation, and Robert G. Ranney, Leo Doyle Robert T. Giboney, and John R. Jeannin, directors in said railroad company, and Louis Houck," defendants. The substance of that petition (according to the statement of the counsel for defendants in the supreme court, which statement is regarded as sufficiently full for the purposes of the prohibition case) is as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Stobie
... ... Held that, where a complaint was filed against members of the metropolitan police force of the city of St. Louis, having no place of permanent residence or property in the county, before a justice of St. Louis county for an act committed within such county, it ... In Railway Co. v. Wear, 135 Mo. 230, 36 S. W. 357, 658, 33 L. R. A. 341, the court, in announcing the rule applicable to the subject now in hand, used this language: "Where ... ...
-
The State ex rel. McNamee v. Stobie
... ... is within its jurisdiction." State ex rel. v ... Sale, 188 Mo. 496; State ex rel. v. Elkin, 130 ... Mo. 105; State ex rel. v. Wear, 135 Mo. 256; ... State ex rel. v. Eby, 170 Mo. 497; State ex rel ... v. Cline, 85 Mo.App. 628; Quimbo v. People, 20 ... N.Y. 541. (3) It ... committing felonies therein. Members of the metropolitan ... police of the city of St. Louis had authority to arrest such ... persons in St. Louis county, and in entering the premises of ... the Delmar Jockey Club for that purpose, they ... ...
-
Hernreich v. Quinn
... ... Phillips, 260 ... Mo. 664, 169 S.W. 55; Stuart v. Ramsey, 196 Mo. l ... c. 416, 95 S.W. 382; Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. St ... Louis County, 240 S.W. 107. (5) The adjudication of ... Hernreich's property rights without notice to him was ... violative of the Missouri ... Westhues, 316 Mo. 457, 469(I), 290 S.W. 443, ... 446(2); In re Letcher, 269 Mo. 140, 147, 190 S.W. 19, 21(1); ... St. L., K. & S. Rd. Co. v. Wear, 135 Mo. 230, 265(6), 36 S.W ... 357, 366(6), 33 L. R. A. 341 ... [ 2 ] 25 Am. Jur., sec. 29, p. 164; 29 C. J., ... sec. 23, p. 35; Ex parte ... ...
-
State ex rel. Kansas City Public Service Co. v. Waltner
... ... 909, 30 S.W.2d 105; Dahlberg v ... Fisse, 328 Mo. 213, 40 S.W.2d 606; State ex rel ... McAllister v. Slate, 278 Mo. 570; St. Louis, etc., ... R. Co. v. Wear, 135 Mo. 230; State ex rel. Wright v ... McQuillin, 252 Mo. 334; State ex rel. St. Louis v ... Beck, 330 Mo. 118, ... ...