State ex rel. St. Louis Underground Service Co. v. Murphy
Supreme Court of Missouri
Mandamus. (1) The return is false in fact, known to respondent to be false, was not authorized by him, or made under any instructions from him, and is a contempt of this court. State v. Railroad, 41 N. J. L. 250; Bac. Abr., Mandamus; Merrill on Mandamus, sec. 282. (2) The traverses in the return are not positive averments of fact, but allegations on information, or vague and undefined denials, which nowise show a right to refuse obedience to the-alternative writ. High on Ex.
Read the full summary
Mandamus. (1) The return is false in fact, known to respondent to be false, was not authorized by him, or made under any instructions from him, and is a contempt of this court. State v. Railroad, 41 N. J. L. 250; Bac. Abr., Mandamus; Merrill on Mandamus, sec. 282. (2) The traverses in the return are not positive averments of fact, but allegations on information, or vague and undefined denials, which nowise show a right to refuse obedience to the-alternative writ. High on Ex. Rem., secs. 460, 464, 469, 479, 481; State v. Lean, 9 Miss. 279; Levi v. English, 4 Ark. 65; Springfield v. County…
1Opinion of the Court
DIVISION ONE,
Maceaklane, J.
On the fifteenth day of February, 1889, an ordinance of the city of St. Louis, number 14798, entitled, “An ordinance to provide for laying electric wires underground,” was passed and approved.
By section 1 permission and authority was granted the National Subway Company, of Missouri, its successors and assigns, to construct, maintain, and operate, conduits, pipes, mains, conductors, manholes, and service and supply pipes in any of the streets, *555alleys, squares, avenues, and public highways, of the city of St. Louis, for the term of thirty-five consecutive years. The…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Thomas v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Scovill v. ThayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Goszler v. Corporation of GeorgetownSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
- Julia Building Ass'n v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1885
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Donovan v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1943
- Anglo-American Land, Mortgage & Agency Co. v. LombardCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Pikes Peak Power Co. v. City of Colorado SpringsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
- Minnesota Canal & Power Co. v. Koochiching Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- State ex rel. National Subway Co. v. St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.