Heman Construction Co. v. Lyon
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit' Court. — lion. Leo S. Rassieur, Judge. (1) The trial court erred in holding the tax bills valid, because the ordinance authorizing the work for which they were issued contained no direction to advertise for bids. Sec. 27, Art. 6, St. Louis Charter 1902. The words “the same” in that section refer to the antecedent “ordinance authorizing the doing of the work.” 2 Kent’s Comm. (14 Ed.) sec. 555; Coke on Litt. (1 Am.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit' Court. — lion. Leo S. Rassieur, Judge. (1) The trial court erred in holding the tax bills valid, because the ordinance authorizing the work for which they were issued contained no direction to advertise for bids. Sec. 27, Art. 6, St. Louis Charter 1902. The words “the same” in that section refer to the antecedent “ordinance authorizing the doing of the work.” 2 Kent’s Comm. (14 Ed.) sec. 555; Coke on Litt. (1 Am. Ed.) secs. 20b, 38b; Smith v. Boyd, 101 N. Y. 472. Comparison of Section 27 with its predecessor under former charter as construed by the courts…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
This appeal seeks the review of a suit tried in the circuit court of the City of St. Louis, which resulted in a judgment in favor of respondent, for the enforcement of the lien of six special tax bills against parcels of land owned by appellants. These bills had been issued by said city to the respondent, for the construction of what was designated as a Second Section of the North Harlem Joint District Sewer. Numerous special defenses were interposed. We will examine those to which the appellants call attention in their assignment of errors, which are as follows:
*634That the trial court erred in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- American Tobacco Co. v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1912
- McGhee v. WalshSupreme Court of Missouri · 1913
- Kelley v. MortonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- City of Poplar Bluff ex rel. Jolly v. BaconMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Jaicks v. Middlesex Investment Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- McMurry v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1920
- Flinn v. GillenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
- Missouri Electric Power Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
- Doemker v. City of Richmond HeightsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
- Platte City Benefit Assessment Special Road District v. CouchSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.