State ex rel. Attorney General v. Miller
Supreme Court of Missouri
Quo Warranto. The act of March 30, 1887, is unconstitutional and invalid : (1) Because said act contains more than one subject, and the subject is not clearly expressed in the title. Const. Mo., art. 4, sec. 28; Sedgwick on Const. and Stat. Law, p. 521%/ Ewing v. Eoblitzelle, 85 Mo. 71; State ex rel. v. County Court, 41 Mo. 39; City of St. Louis v. Tiefel, 42 Mo. 578; City r>. Payne, 71 Mo. 159. (2) Because said act is a local and special law. Const.
Read the full summary
Quo Warranto. The act of March 30, 1887, is unconstitutional and invalid : (1) Because said act contains more than one subject, and the subject is not clearly expressed in the title. Const. Mo., art. 4, sec. 28; Sedgwick on Const. and Stat. Law, p. 521%/ Ewing v. Eoblitzelle, 85 Mo. 71; State ex rel. v. County Court, 41 Mo. 39; City of St. Louis v. Tiefel, 42 Mo. 578; City r>. Payne, 71 Mo. 159. (2) Because said act is a local and special law. Const. Mo., art. 4, secs. 28, 53 and 54; Const. Mo., art. 9, sec. 7; Const. Mo., art. 13, sec. 2; State ex rel. v.LIerrmann, 75 Mo. 340; State ex rel.…
1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.
This is an information in the nature of a guo warranto, prosecuted by the attorney general to test the right of the respondent to the office of director in the public schools in the city of St. Louis, and the controversy is made to turn upon the constitutionality of the act of March 30, 1887 (Laws of 1887, p. 272).
The special act of February 13, 1833, and the special amendments thereof (2 Ter. Laws, 399, and 2 R. S. 1879, p. 1536), created a corporation for school purposes by the name of “ the board of president and directors of the St. Louis public schools,” embracing the territorial limits…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ewing v. HoblitzelleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- State ex rel. Attorney General v. MeadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- State ex rel. Lionberger v. TolleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- City of St. Louis v. TiefelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1868
- State v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by69 opinions
- City of St. Louis v. WeitzelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Gabbert v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- People ex rel. Johnson v. EarlSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
- State Ex Rel. McNary v. StussieSupreme Court of Missouri · 1974
- State ex rel. Wiles v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.