Legal Opinion
Twiehaus v. Wright City
Supreme Court of Missouri
Decided March 13, 1967No. 52209PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LAURANCE M. HYDE, Special Commissioner.
Action, in three counts, the first two for $8308.17 claimed to be the balance due on a contract for construction of water and sewer lines between plaintiffs and the city; with a third count-seeking recovery on the theory of inverse condemnation for the value of the lines. The City’s answer alleged the contract was invalid being in violation of Sec. 26(a), Art. VI of the Constitution and Secs. 88.670 and 432.070. (Statutory references are to RSMo and V. A.M.S.) The answer also denied any condemnation or appropriation of the water and sewer lines…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Donovan v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1943
- Powers v. ShoreSupreme Court of Missouri · 1952
- Page v. Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1964
- State Upon the Information of McKittrick v. Missouri Utilities Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1936
- Beetschen v. Shell Pipe Line Corp.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1952
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Nika Corp. v. City of Kansas City, Mo.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1984
- Shelton v. M & a Electric Power CooperativeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1970
- Marvin E. Nieberg Real Estate Co. v. St. Louis CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1973
- County of Bollinger v. LaddMissouri Court of Appeals · 1978
- McIntosh v. City of JoplinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1972
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.