State ex rel. Modern Woodmen of America v. Broaddus
Supreme Court of Missouri
Mandamus. (1) The court will take judicial notice of the time the stated terms of court commence and the date when the motion was filed, that is, the eighteenth day of May,' 1910, excludes the idea that the court was in session at the next term after the judgment term, as the times fixed by statute for the terms of the circuit court of Adair county are the third Monday in May and the fourth Monday in October, hence the court could not on any date in May or June, 1910, have…
Read the full summary
Mandamus. (1) The court will take judicial notice of the time the stated terms of court commence and the date when the motion was filed, that is, the eighteenth day of May,' 1910, excludes the idea that the court was in session at the next term after the judgment term, as the times fixed by statute for the terms of the circuit court of Adair county are the third Monday in May and the fourth Monday in October, hence the court could not on any date in May or June, 1910, have been in session at the October term of court. Ray County Savings Bank v. Hutton, 224 Mo. 51. (2) The certified copy of…
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
— Mandamus to compel respondents, as judges of the Kansas City Court of Appeals, to set aside an order made by them, as such judges, in March, 1911, affirming a judgment of the circuit court of Adair county, wherein one Nannie Floyd is respondent and the Modern Woodmen of America, a fraternal benefit society, is appellant.
The writ also seeks to compel respondents to set aside an order made by them in said cause denying said appellant a rehearing, and to compel said respondents to re-docket said cause and to hear and determine . same on the whole record presented by said appeal.
An examination…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ray County Savings Bank v. HuttonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- State ex rel. Title Guaranty & Trust Co. v. BroaddusSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Pennowfsky v. CoerverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Hadley v. BerneroMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- State ex rel. Union Electric Light & Power Co. v. GrimmSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State Ex Rel. May Department Stores Co. v. HaidSupreme Court of Missouri · 1931
- State ex rel. Knisely v. HoltcampSupreme Court of Missouri · 1915
- State ex rel. Snow Steam Pump Works v. HomerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1913
- State Ex Rel. Kansas City Light & Power Co. v. TrimbleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
- State ex rel. Field v. EllisonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1919
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.