Uhrig v. City of St. Louis

• Decision Date: 31 March 1871
• Citation: Uhrig v. City of St. Louis, 47 Mo. 528 (Mo. 1871)
• Parties: JOSEPH UHRIG, Appellant, v. THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Respondent.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

47 Mo. 528

JOSEPH UHRIG, Appellant,

v.THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March Term, 1871.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court.

The plaintiff obtained an injunction against the city in a controversy which came before this court at its October Term, 1869, and is reported in 44 Mo. 458.After the decision here reversing the decree and dismissing the bill, the city claiming an attorney's fee for defending the injunction, filed a motion to assess the same against the appellants as damages upon the injunction bond.No other damages were claimed.The motion was submitted to the court below on an agreement of facts, from which it appears that defendant employed no special counsel in the cause, but that the cause was defendant by the city counseor, the law officer of the city, who receives a stated salary annually for all the business he does for the city.

Kehr, for appellant.

Reber,City Counselor, for respondent.

BLISS, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

Upon dissolution of an injunction the statute provides that “the damages shall be assessed,” etc.These damages are what the defendant actually suffered.In this case no damages at all have been suffered in consequence of injunction, therefore no damages should have been assessed.

It has been customary to...