Heman v. Payne
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from tlie St. Louis Circuit Court, Geoege W. Lubke, Judge. That said sewer was “ made to connect with a public sewer or a natural course of drainage,” was a constitutive fact, and also that the ordinance (on which this whole proceeding rests) was passed on the recommendation of the board of public improvements, or on the petition of a majority of the property holders resident in said sewer district.
Read the full summary
Appeal from tlie St. Louis Circuit Court, Geoege W. Lubke, Judge. That said sewer was “ made to connect with a public sewer or a natural course of drainage,” was a constitutive fact, and also that the ordinance (on which this whole proceeding rests) was passed on the recommendation of the board of public improvements, or on the petition of a majority of the property holders resident in said sewer district. Section 22, article 6, of the Scheme and Charter; City of St. Louis v. Gleason, -89 Mo. 67; Nichols, Shepard <& Go. v. Larhin, 79 Mo. 264, 271; Kane v. Klausman, 21 Mo. App. 485; Thrush v.…
1Opinion of the CourtRombauer, J.
This is a suit upon a special tax bill issued for work done in the construction of a district sewer in the city of St. Louis. The case was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury and resulted in a judgment for the plaintiff. The appealing defendants assign the following errors: (1) That the court erred in overruling the motion in arrest of judgment, as the petition fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (2) That the court admitted illegal evidence against the objection of the defendants. (3) That the court gave erroneous declarations of law for the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Eyerman v. BlaksleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- City of St. Louis v. GleasonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
3Cited by2 opinions
- Heman v. WolffMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
- Donovan v. ColesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888