Legal Opinion

Williams v. Chariton County

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided April 15, 1885PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Error to Chariton Circuit Court. This case was submitted to the Chariton county circuit court on an agreed statement of facts, and upon that statement judgment was rendered in favor of respondent, from which plaintiff appealed. This agreed statement shows that in the general election of 1876, plaintiff was elected assessor of Chariton county, for which place he duly qualified and entered on the discharge of its duties.

Read the full summary

Error to Chariton Circuit Court. This case was submitted to the Chariton county circuit court on an agreed statement of facts, and upon that statement judgment was rendered in favor of respondent, from which plaintiff appealed. This agreed statement shows that in the general election of 1876, plaintiff was elected assessor of Chariton county, for which place he duly qualified and entered on the discharge of its duties. That the legislature in 1877 passed a law making it the duty of the county assessor ' to list and register each and every dog over three months of age, owned or kept by any…

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cueiam.

Under the authority of the case of Shed v. Ry. Co., 67 Mo. 687, no fees are allowed an officer except where expressly given and allowed by law. Moreover the compensation of assessors, except in St. Louis county, is fixed at a certain sum, and this sum includes all personal property assessed to one owner. Dogs being assessed in the list of personal property makes no increase in the emoluments of the assessor. See section 69, W. S. 1872, p. 1172. Therefore, judgment affirmed.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Shed v. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. County of Nodaway v. KidderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1939
  2. State ex rel. Evans v. GordonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1912
  3. Maxwell v. Andrew CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
  4. Jefferson Bank v. Merchants Refrigrating Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1911
  5. State Ex Rel. Buder v. HackmannSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924

8 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