State ex rel. Bornefeld v. Rombauer
Supreme Court of Missouri
Jlppcal from, St.. Louis Circuit Court. Relator has an action at law — a-complete and adequate remedy— and where aÉ substantial remedy'by-action at law exists, mandamus does not lie.-■ (State ea; rei-i-Bohannan -vv Howard County,:..89-Mo:. 3T6exparte Ereeitían’s-Iñs.-Co.; 6 Hill,: 248■; Shipley v.. Merchants’ Bank, 10; Johns. 485; King v.-Banlc'of England, Doug. 525; Ang.í&.Ames on Córp.;-8th ed.,'-§§ 709, 710.)
1Opinion of the CourtWagkeR, Judge
This was an-application for a mandamus- made to' the St. Louis Circuit Court by the relator against the respondent as president of the German Publishing Company. • The writ recites that the German Publishing Company was organized as á corpo*156ration under the statute laws of this State, and that the respondent was president of the corporation and the custodian of ita hooks; that on the 19th day of May, 1869, one August Lenz was a stockholder in said company and owned more than two shares of the capital stock, and was registered as such owner on the books of the company; that afterward, on the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- American Asylum at Hartford v. President of the Phoenix BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1822
- Shipley v. Mechanics' BankNew York Supreme Court · 1813
- Boyce v. RussellNew York Supreme Court · 1824
3Cited by5 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Kelley v. MitchellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1980
- Durham v. Monumental Silver Mining Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1880
- State ex rel. Lyons v. Bank of ConceptionMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- State ex rel. Koons v. First National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
- State ex rel. Mepham v. St. Louis Paint Manufacturing Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1886