Legal Opinion

Drainage District Number 23 of New Madrid County v. Hetlage

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided March 1, 1937PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFulbright, J.

In order to better understand the issues in this' lease, the pleadings are set out at length. Omitting the formal parts, the petition-and amended answer follow:

Petition.

I Plaintiff states that it is now and was at all times hereinafter Imentioned, a corporation formed, organized, and existing under and Iby virtue of the laws of the State of Missouri, relative to Drain-lage Districts.

I Plaintiff further states that on the 30th day of October, 1934, the |iollowing described real estate situated in New Madrid County, Mis-louri, to-wit:

South one-half (!) of Section Twenty-two (22), Township…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Ex Parte Keane v. StrodtmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
  2. United States v. BashawCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892
  3. State Ex Inf. Atty-Gen. v. Long-Bell Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1928
  4. Little River Drainage District v. SheppardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
  5. McAnally v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Rouveyrol v. DonnellySupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
  2. Drainage District No. 48 of Dunklin County v. SmallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1958
  3. Davis v. StephensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1939
  4. Goldfield Consolidated Mines Co. v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Kostman v. Pine Lawn Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1976

2 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