Legal Opinion

Young v. City of St. Louis

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 15, 1871PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. I. In proceedings of this character it must affirmatively appear that the council declared it necessary to lay the pipe. The law is express : they must “ so declare.” “Necessity” in this case is not synonymous with “expediency.”

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. I. In proceedings of this character it must affirmatively appear that the council declared it necessary to lay the pipe. The law is express : they must “ so declare.” “Necessity” in this case is not synonymous with “expediency.” (Commonwealth v. Egremont, 6 Mass. 491 ;• 2 Mass. 271; 29 Conn. 495; Hunter v. Newport, 5 R. I. 329; 23 Me. 9; 2 Pick. 228 ; Conners v. Swain, 8 Pick. 547 ; Jones v. Anderson, 9 Pick. 132 ; Bethel v. County Court, 42 Me. 479 ; 8 Conn. 164, 243 ; 9 Conn. 232; 11 Conn. 577; 17 Conn. 197; 1 Dutch., N. J., 434; Mallett v Kennan, 22…

1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge

The certiorari issued in this case brings up the record of the board of water commissioners, and the question is whether the action of the board, in making an assessment against the respondent for laying a water-pipe in front of his property on *494Gamble avenue., was legal. The power was exercised under the provisions of an act amendatory to the act to enable the city of St. Louis to procure a supply of wholesome water. (Adj. Sess. Acts 1868, p. 291.)

• The law provides that whenever a majority in interest of the property-holders on any street, lane or alley, in the city of St. Louis, shall…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. The People v. . BowenNew York Court of Appeals · 1860

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Bellerive Investment Co. v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
  2. Connor v. City of ParisTexas Supreme Court · 1894
  3. State ex rel. City of Carthage v. GordonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
  4. Flinn v. GillenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
  5. City of Hannibal v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872

10 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