State ex rel. McClure v. Bird
| Citation | 202 S.W. 436,199 Mo.App. 76 |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. McCLURE et al., Relators, v. DANIEL E. BIRD, Respondent |
| Decision Date | 18 March 1918 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Kansas |
Special rules of the Circuit Court of Jackson County discussed.
PROHIBITION MADE PERMANENT.
J. A Harzfeld and Chas. M. Blackmar for relators.
C. C Madison for respondent.
Relator McClure is an officer of Kansas City, Missouri, known as the censor of films and pictures. Relator Flahive is the Chief of Police for said city and the other relators are police officers. Respondent is Judge of division 8, of the circuit court of Jackson county, and as Judge of such court issued a temporary injunction or restraining order against relators, restraining them from interfering with William H. Quigley in his exhibition to the general public who desired or were induced, to view a certain picture advertised and called: "I, Mary McLane--Men Who Have Made Love To Me."
The circuit court of Jackson county is composed of several divisions each presided over by its own Judge, each Judge, except as restrained by certain rules, acting as a circuit court and exercising full power and authority of a circuit court presided over by a sole circuit Judge. That court business may be expedited and orderly administration had, the statute (secs. 3968-3976, R. S. 1909) authorizes such Judges, acting in a banc, to pass certain rules and regulations in addition to the rules and regulations which may be adopted by circuit court generally. In pursuance of this power the court, in banc, provided that at stated periods one of the divisions should be designated as the assignment division to be presided over by the Judge of that division. Under these rules, statutes and regulations, the judge of the assignment division issues all temporary and alternative orders in applications for extraordinary writs, except in urgent instances when he may not be found in the court house, application may be made to one of the other divisions, or the Judge thereof.
At the time respondent herein issued the temporary restraining order above mentioned the division presided over by Judge LUCAS, one of the Judges of said court, was duly designated assignment division. But on the statement of Quigley, that he could not be found, the respondent, acting under said rules and regulations, issued the temporary restraining order on the 2nd of February, 1918, returnable to the assignment division presided over by Judge LUCAS, on the 11th day of February, 1918. Afterwards, on February 4, 1918, relators filed their motion in such assignment division to which the restraining order issued by respondent was returned, to dissolve such order. This motion was continued until the next day, when, all parties appearing, the assignment division presided over by Judge LUCAS sustained said motion and dissolved said order.
After dissolution of such restraining order relators caused the arrest of the exhibitors of such picture for continuing to exhibit it in violation of an ordinance of Kansas City. Thereupon the respondent issued a citation against relators to show cause why they should not be attached for contempt in violating respondents temporary restraining order. Whereupon relators applied to this court for a writ of prohibition and a temporary order was issued. Respondent has made return and relators have filed a motion for judgment thereon.
The foregoing is a sufficient statement of the facts for our decision. It will be observed that the assignment...
To continue reading
Request your trial