City of St. Louis ex rel. Creamer v. Bernoudy
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. I. The tax bill offered in evidence was no evidence against the land or defendant Garesche, he holding the legal title of the land, and his name not appearing on the said bill. The law (Sess. Acts 1865-6, p. 298) makes the bill evidence against the person therein named.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. I. The tax bill offered in evidence was no evidence against the land or defendant Garesche, he holding the legal title of the land, and his name not appearing on the said bill. The law (Sess. Acts 1865-6, p. 298) makes the bill evidence against the person therein named. Therefore, as there was no evidence in the case against the land except the bill, which was not made out against the person in whom the legal title was, the judgment of the court below should be reversed. II. The record shows that the general term affirmed the judgment of the special term,…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner., Judge
This action was brought in the St. Louis Circuit Court to enforce the payment of a balance due on a special tax bill issued by the St. Louis city engineer, under a contract for constructing a district sewer. The legal title of the land sought to be charged with the payment of the tax is vested by deed in .Alex. J. P„ Garesche, as trustee, for the sole and separate use of Mary J. Bernoudy, who is a married woman and the equitable owner of the land. The city engineer made his assessment against the land, and made out the tax bill against the same in the name of Mrs. Bernoudy alone — the name of…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Moberly v. HoganSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Sheehan v. GleesonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- Keating v. CraigSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- Kefferstein v. KnoxSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- McCormick v. CloptonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.