State ex rel. Schierberg v. Green

• Decision Date: 14 February 1876
• Citation: 1 Mo.App. 226
• Parties: THE STATE, ex rel. GEORGE SCHIERBERG, Relator, v. JOHN GREEN et al., Respondents.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

1 Mo.App. 226

THE STATE, ex rel. GEORGE SCHIERBERG, Relator,

v.JOHN GREEN et al., Respondents.

St. Louis Court of Appeals, Missouri.

Feb. 14, 1876.

The functions of this court, under the Constitution, are mainly those of an appellate tribunal, and it will discourage the presentation to it of petitions asking for a remedial writ in cases which may involve the trial of an issue of fact.

APPLICATION for mandamus.

Writ denied, with leave to relator to withdraw application from the files.

Foster & Meier, for relator.

BAKEWELL, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

The relator filed a petition in this court, in which he sets forth that respondents, together with Ferdinand Meyer, are commissioners for Exchange Square, in the city of St. Louis; that, by virtue of certain acts of the Legislature and ordinances of the city of St. Louis, set out by their title in the petition, John G. Joyce was, on June 26, 1875, superintendent of public parks of said city, and was empowered, with the approval of the local board of commissioners, to appoint one proper person as keeper of Exchange Square, and did, in due form of law, appoint the relator keeper of Exchange Square, at a salary of $1.75 per day; that relator served in that capacity from July 15, 1875, to November 30, 1875; that, in accordance with the ordinance in that behalf, said Joyce signed a pay-roll certifying that relator had worked, as aforesaid, fifteen days, and was entitled therefor to a compensation of $26.25; that Ferdinand Meyer, being satisfied that said pay-roll was correct, signed the same as by ordinance, as such commissioner, he was bound to do; but that respondents, although said pay-roll is correct, unlawfully refused, and still refuse, to certify the same; that without such certificate the auditor of the city of St. Louis refuses to issue a warrant upon the treasurer of said city for said sum of $26.25 in favor of relator, and that when such certificate is duly signed said auditor will issue his warrant on said treasurer in favor of relator for said sum. Relator prays an order from this court commanding respondents to perform their duty, by certifying said payroll according to law.

The petition is very lengthy, and sets out by their title many acts of the Legislature and ordinances of the city of St. Louis. We have stated enough to show its general object, and we express no opinion on the merits of the application.

This court has power to issue writs of habeas corpus, quo warranto, certiorari,...