State ex rel. Knisely v. Board of Trustees of Young Women's Christian Association
| Citation | 186 S.W. 680,268 Mo. 163 |
| Parties | THE STATE ex rel. ELIZABETH C. KNISELY, Administratrix of Estate of CHARLES H. KNISELY, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF YOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION et al |
| Decision Date | 15 May 1916 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
Writ granted.
E. P Johnson, Edward C. Crow and Morton Jourdan for relator
(1) The two motions filed in the circuit court are founded on the proposition that the final settlement of July 7, 1909, of the Leathe estate was valid. If the settlement was void the motions have no legal basis on which to rest. Whether the settlement of July 7, 1909, was valid or void and whether thereafter Grace A. Leathe legally represented the estate in the suit terminating in the judgment sought by motions to be set aside was forever set at rest and is now res judicata by the decision in State ex rel. Knisely v. Holtcamp, 181 S.W. 1007. (2) Interference by one court with another court's jurisdiction is properly prevented by prohibition. The Constitution of Missouri, art. 6, sec. 3 gives the Supreme Court superintending control over all inferior tribunals. Neither the circuit court nor any other court can now intermeddle with or interfere with or make any order or entertain any motion or other proceeding affecting the judgment entered in said circuit court in favor of the relator as administratrix against Grace A. Leathe as executrix of the estate of Samuel H. Leathe, deceased because the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court having attached, it excludes the jurisdiction of all other courts of even coordinate jurisdiction from attaching and interfering with the enforcement of the orders of the Supreme Court. State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 209 Mo. 188; State ex rel. v. Barnett, 245 Mo. 122. These motions are an attempt in the circuit court to oust the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in this matter and a direct effort to defeat the judgment which was entered in pursuance of the specific direction of the Supreme Court after the Supreme Court has decided it will enforce its own mandate and enforce the very judgment sought by these motions to be vacated. (3) The executrix, Grace A. Leathe, is estopped from alleging she did not represent the Leathe estate in relator's suit, and the respondents, Board of Trustees of Young Women's Christian Association and the Scottish Rite Cathredral Association, being in privity of estate with her, are also estopped. State ex rel. v. Homer, 249 Mo. 76; Rogers v. Johns, 125 Mo. 216; Aubuchon v Aubuchon, 133 Mo. 265; Woerner's Am. Law of Administration (2 Ed.), pp. 1044-1045.
Frank H. Sullivan and Manton Davis for respondents.
In Banc.
Prohibition.
-- Those who are interested in a more complete history than here given of the case out of which this proceeding arose are referred to State ex rel. Knisely v. Holtcamp, 266 Mo. 347, 181 S.W. 1007; Knisely v. Leathe, 178 S.W 453; and Knisely v. Leathe, 256 Mo. 341, 166 S.W. 257. For our instant purpose, it suffices to say that, after prolonged litigation, this court, on June 1, 1915, directed the circuit court of the city of St. Louis to render judgment for relator herein in the aggregate amount of $ 192,263.75, and that, in pursuance thereof, the circuit court, on July 2, 1915, duly entered such judgment. At relator's instance, and in compliance with this court's direction, this judgment was, on July 14, 1915, certified to the probate court for classification, but that court refused to classify the judgment, upon the ground that, prior thereto, it had approved an alleged final settlement of the estate, and finally discharged the executrix, and was, therefore, without jurisdictional authority to act in the matter. Immediately thereafter, to-wit, on July 30, 1915, this court issued its alternative writ of mandamus, and same was duly served upon the respondent therein, to-wit, the probate judge. Sometime thereafter, namely, on October 18, 1915, and while the mandamus cause was pending in this court, two of respondents herein, to-wit, the Board of Trustees of the Young Women's Christian Association and the Scottish Rite Cathedral Association, filed in the court of their co-respondent, Hon. Kent Koerner, Judge of Division No. 6 of the circuit court of the city of St. Louis, a motion to vacate and set aside the judgment which it, in compliance with this court's directions, had theretofore rendered in favor of relator. This motion to vacate was predicated upon the theory, and alleges as its grounds, that the judgment directed by this court was invalid, because the estate had theretofore been finally settled, and the executrix fully discharged. These identical propositions were relied upon by the probate court in refusing to classify the judgment certified to it in accordance with this court's directions, and these particular questions were the only questions involved in the action then pending in this court against the probate judge. Since that time this court has made its preliminary writ of mandamus permanent, and in that case held that the alleged final settlement of July 7, 1909, was void as a final settlement, and had only the effect of an annual settlement. In that case there was directly presented and decided the identical questions which the motion to vacate...
To continue reading
Request your trial