Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State ex rel. McDaniel v. Schramm

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided December 12, 1917Published

Quo Warranto. (1) It is admitted that the State has the power to control the election of assessor of the city of St. Louis and to regulate the conduct of the office in precisely the same manner and to the same extent as it has power in relation to the assessors of the several counties of the State. (2) The State has expressly refused to act in regard to the assessor of St. Louis.

Read the full summary

Quo Warranto. (1) It is admitted that the State has the power to control the election of assessor of the city of St. Louis and to regulate the conduct of the office in precisely the same manner and to the same extent as it has power in relation to the assessors of the several counties of the State. (2) The State has expressly refused to act in regard to the assessor of St. Louis. Ever since the city was separated from the county in 1876 the State has expressly exempted the city from the statutory provisions relating to the office of assessor. Sec. 11341, R. S. 1909, and all the provisions of…

1ConcurrenceParis, J.

(concurring) — I have had much difficulty with this case. It is a close and vexing one, wherein the controlling and vital questions up for solution are colored and affected by a multitude of converging, but conflicting, rules of law, whereof a selection involving the utmost nicety of discussion must be made. Against my own predilections, held at the argument of the case, I have been constrained to concur with Bond, J., but I shall take the liberty, even at the risk of repetition, of setting out my reasons for this concurrence.

When the Constitution of 1875 went into effect, there existed in…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. City of St. Louis v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
  2. State ex rel. Missouri & Mississippi Railroad v. Macon County CourtSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
  3. Manker v. FaulhaberSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  4. State ex rel. Harvey v. WrightSupreme Court of Missouri · 1913
  5. State v. BennettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API