Swineford v. Franklin Cnty.
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
| Writing for the Court | SHERWOOD |
| Citation | 73 Mo. 279 |
| Parties | SWINEFORD et al., Appellants, v. FRANKLIN COUNTY. |
| Decision Date | 31 October 1880 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
19 practice notes
-
Zoll v. St. Louis County, No. 34970.
...as to the proper performance of its duty." It was ruled that the demurrer was properly sustained. Swineford et al. v. Franklin County, 73 Mo. 279, was an action for consequential damages resulting from the action of the county court in causing to be filled up a millrace in order to prevent ......
-
Bd. of Com'rs of Jasper Cnty. v. Allman
...v. Pulaski Co., 26 Ark. 37;Downing v. Mason Co., 87 Ky. 208, 8 S. W. 264;Reardon v. St. Louis Co., 36 Mo. 555;Swineford v. Franklin Co., 73 Mo. 279;Clark v. Adair Co., 79 Mo. 536;Gilman v. Contra Costa Co., 8 Cal. 52;Id., 68 Am. Dec. 290, and note on pages 294 and 295; Barnett v. Contra Cos......
-
Board of Commissioners of Jasper County v. Allman, 17,386
...v. Mason County, 87 Ky. 208, 12 Am. St. Rep. 437, 8 S.W. 264; Reardon v. St. Louis County, 36 Mo. 555; Swineford v. Franklin County, 73 Mo. 279; Clark v. Adair County, 79 Mo. 536; Gilman v. County of Contra Costa, 8 Cal. 52, 68 Am. Dec. 290, and note on pages 294 and 295; Barnett v. County ......
-
Tritz v. City of Kansas
...it liable that this duty may be imposed upon its common council. Reardon v. St. Louis County, 36 Mo. 555; Swinfield v. Franklin County, 73 Mo. 279, and 6 Mo. App. 39; Tranter v. City of Sacramento, 61 Cal. 271; Winbiggler v. City of Los Angeles, 45 Cal. 36. Dillon on Mun. Corp. (3 Ed.) sect......
Request a trial to view additional results
19 cases
-
Zoll v. St. Louis County, No. 34970.
...as to the proper performance of its duty." It was ruled that the demurrer was properly sustained. Swineford et al. v. Franklin County, 73 Mo. 279, was an action for consequential damages resulting from the action of the county court in causing to be filled up a millrace in order to prevent ......
-
Bd. of Com'rs of Jasper Cnty. v. Allman
...v. Pulaski Co., 26 Ark. 37;Downing v. Mason Co., 87 Ky. 208, 8 S. W. 264;Reardon v. St. Louis Co., 36 Mo. 555;Swineford v. Franklin Co., 73 Mo. 279;Clark v. Adair Co., 79 Mo. 536;Gilman v. Contra Costa Co., 8 Cal. 52;Id., 68 Am. Dec. 290, and note on pages 294 and 295; Barnett v. Contra Cos......
-
Board of Commissioners of Jasper County v. Allman, 17,386
...v. Mason County, 87 Ky. 208, 12 Am. St. Rep. 437, 8 S.W. 264; Reardon v. St. Louis County, 36 Mo. 555; Swineford v. Franklin County, 73 Mo. 279; Clark v. Adair County, 79 Mo. 536; Gilman v. County of Contra Costa, 8 Cal. 52, 68 Am. Dec. 290, and note on pages 294 and 295; Barnett v. County ......
-
Tritz v. City of Kansas
...it liable that this duty may be imposed upon its common council. Reardon v. St. Louis County, 36 Mo. 555; Swinfield v. Franklin County, 73 Mo. 279, and 6 Mo. App. 39; Tranter v. City of Sacramento, 61 Cal. 271; Winbiggler v. City of Los Angeles, 45 Cal. 36. Dillon on Mun. Corp. (3 Ed.) sect......
Request a trial to view additional results