State v. Carothers
Decision Date | 27 September 1919 |
Docket Number | No. 21359.,21359. |
Citation | 214 S.W. 857 |
Parties | STATE ex rel. CROW v. CAROTHERS, City Clerk. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Adair County; James A. Cooley, Judge.
Mandamus by the State of Missouri, at the relation of Willis I. Crow, against J. C. Carothers, Clerk of the City of Kirksville, Mo. Peremptory writ issued. Motion for new trial and in arrest overruled, and defendant appeals. Case transferred to Court of Appeals.
A. Doneghy, of Kirksville, for appellant.
W. F. Frank, of Kirksville, for respondent.
SMALL, C. I.
This was a proceeding in mandamus, instituted in the circuit court of Adair county, to compel the respondent, J. C. Carothers, city clerk of Kirksville, to submit certain petitions filed with him for the recall of O. M. Hutchinson, councilman at large of said city, to the city council of said city for action thereon. The alternative writ alleged, among other things, that said city was a city of the third class and had more than 3,000 and less than 12,000 population, and had elected to adopt the provisions of the act of the Forty-Seventh General Assembly of Missouri entitled "An act providing for an alternative form of government for cities of the third class," etc., approved March 28, 1913 (Laws 1913, p. 517). The proceeding was founded wholly upon said act.
The return alleged matters tending to show that said petitions for recall were defective in material respects, and did not comply with the provisions of said act. It further alleged that section 19 of said act, upon which the action was based, was in violation of certain enumerated sections of the Constitution of this state and of the United States.
The trial resulted in a finding for the relator and the granting of the peremptory writ. In his motions for a new trial and in arrest, appellant saved the constitutional points raised in his return. Said motions being overruled, he appealed to this court.
II. In this court appellant has filed two carefully prepared briefs, each containing an assignment of errors, points and authorities, and further argument; but he nowhere therein refers to any of the constitutional provisions invoked by his pleading in the court below, except in the argument in one of his briefs, where he says:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Skaggs v. Gotham Mining & Milling Co.
...Co., 184 S.W. 1149, 1150; Kemper Mill & Elevator Co. v. Mo. P. Ry. Co., 178 S.W. 502; McManus v. Burrows, 217 S.W. 512; State ex rel. v. Carothers, 214 S.W. 857, 858; State ex rel. v. Howe Scale Co., 253 Mo. 63, Central Land Co. v. Laidley, 159 U.S. 103, 16 S.Ct. 80, 40 L.Ed. 294; Knop v. C......
-
Ashbrook v. Willis
... ... [Little River Drainage Dist. v. Houck (en ... banc), 282 Mo. 458, 460(1), 222 S.W. 384, 385(2) ... (discussing a constitutional issue); State ex rel. v ... Trimble, 326 Mo. 702, 709, 32 S.W.2d 760, 762(2) ... (discussing the "amount ... [89 S.W.2d 660] ... in dispute") Stuart v ... omission waive our jurisdiction." That case overruled ... the reasoning in State ex rel. Crow v. Carothers, ... 214 S.W. 857, and Scott v. Dickinson, 217 S.W. 270, ... indicating "that the mere abandonment of the ... constitutional question in this ... ...
-
Hurlburt v. Bush
... ... 142, p. 164; 36 Cyc. 1114, ... 1150, 1151; 2 Lewis's Sutherland on Statutory ... Construction (2 Ed.), p. 698, sec. 366; Shank v ... State, 108 N.E. 521; State ex rel. Green County v ... Giddeon, 199 S.W. 948; C. C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v ... Blind, 105 N.E. 492; State ex rel. v. Amick, ... Railroad, 274 Mo. 671; ... State ex rel. McWilliams v. Drainage Dist., 269 Mo ... 444, 190 S.W. 897; State ex rel. Crow v. Carothers ... ...
-
Ashbrook v. Willis
...either party can by either acts of commission or omission waive our jurisdiction." That case overruled the reasoning in State ex rel. Crow v. Carothers, 214 S.W. 857, and Scott v. Dickinson, 217 S.W. 270, indicating "that the mere abandonment of the constitutional question in this court (al......