Legal Opinion

Grossman v. Patton

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided February 21, 1905PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from Carroll Circuit Court. — -Now. Jno. P. Butler, Judge. (1) The record of the township hoard must show affirmatively that the commissioners were freeholders. An omission in this respect violates an express provision of the Constitution. Art. 2, sec. 21, Const.; sec. 10345, R. S. 1899. The terms “freeholder” and “householder” are not synonymous. “A freeholder is a person who possesses a freehold estate- in land.”

Read the full summary

Appeal from Carroll Circuit Court. — -Now. Jno. P. Butler, Judge. (1) The record of the township hoard must show affirmatively that the commissioners were freeholders. An omission in this respect violates an express provision of the Constitution. Art. 2, sec. 21, Const.; sec. 10345, R. S. 1899. The terms “freeholder” and “householder” are not synonymous. “A freeholder is a person who possesses a freehold estate- in land.” Black’s Law Dictionary; Anderson’s Law Dictionary; Fore v. Hoke, 48 Mo. App. 261. “A householder is the occupier of a house; one who keeps house with his family; the head or…

1Opinion of the CourtGantt, J.

— This is a proceeding to condemn certain real estate in Carroll county for a public road. The proposed road is on a township line, and it is assumed by counsel on both sides that township organization had been adopted and was in force in Carroll county. This further appears from the fact that the proposed road is on a township line, and under and by virtue of section 10350, Revised Statutes 1899, the petition was presented to a joint meeting of the township boards of both townships. Respondents are the petitioners for the road, and the appellants filed a remonstrance against the road, over…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Railroad v. StorySupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
  2. Seafield v. BohneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
  3. Fore v. HokeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1892
  4. Shively v. LankfordSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  5. Spurlock v. DornanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Millsap v. QuinnSupreme Court of Missouri · 1990
  2. Jones v. City of AuroraNebraska Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Dillard v. SandersonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1921
  4. Millsap v. QuinnSupreme Court of Missouri · 1990
  5. Ordelheide v. Modern Brotherhood of AmericaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API