Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Barrett v. Boeckler Lumber Co.

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided January 4, 1924PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRagland, J.

Respondents having been found guilty of violating the statute relating to pools, trusts, conspiracies, discriminations and unlawful combinations in restraint of trade, and having had fines aggregating the sum of $96,000 imposed upon them for such violation the relator files his motion asking that the Attorney-General be allowed a fee equal to one-fourth of the fines so imposed, and that the same be taxed as costs against the respondents, all in accordance with the provisions of Section 9675, Revised Statutes 1929. Respondents op pose the motion oil the ground that the statute purporting to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. EhrlickWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. State v. HaysSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
  3. State ex rel. Circuit Attorney v. County CourtSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
  4. State ex rel. McGrath v. WalkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
  5. Groesbeck v. Auditor GeneralMichigan Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Nixon v. American Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2000
  2. Hechler v. CaseyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Johnson v. Commonwealth Ex Rel. MeredithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1942
  4. Dickey v. VolkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
  5. State Ex Rel. McKittrick v. Missouri Public Service Commission, Laclede Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1943

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