Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Suter v. Wilder

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided May 22, 1906PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Mandamus. (1) Criminal costs are “such claims as are expressly required by law to be audited and settled by other officers or persons. ’ ’ Secs. 2845, 2847, 2856,10389, E. S. 1899. The judge and prosecuting attorney are expressly required to adjudicate all the law and all the facts relative to the validity of costs in criminal cases. State ex rel. v. Oliver, 50 Mo.

Read the full summary

Mandamus. (1) Criminal costs are “such claims as are expressly required by law to be audited and settled by other officers or persons. ’ ’ Secs. 2845, 2847, 2856,10389, E. S. 1899. The judge and prosecuting attorney are expressly required to adjudicate all the law and all the facts relative to the validity of costs in criminal cases. State ex rel. v. Oliver, 50 Mo. App. 217. (2) A nonresident witness served with a subpoena at his place of residence in another state and attending court and testifying in this State in obedience to such subpoena is entitled to his fees and mileage to and from…

1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.

This a proceeding by mandamus, instituted by relators, for the purpose of compelling the respondent, as State Auditor, to audit a certain criminal cost bill, which was signed and certified to by the judge of the circuit court of Ralls county, and also signed by the prosecuting attorney of said county, and presented to said auditor. Tt is unnecessary to burden this opinion by reproducing the petition upon which this proceeding is predicated. It will be sufficient for the purpose of determining the controverted propositions involved to indicate the substance of the allegations of the petition.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wilson v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
  2. State ex rel. Keck v. SeibertSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
  3. State ex rel. McMurtry v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
  4. Morgan v. BuffingtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1855
  5. State v. HinksonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1842

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Utah Construction Co. v. State Highway CommissionWyoming Supreme Court · 1933
  2. State v. IvoryMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. State Ex Rel. McDowell, Inc. v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1933
  4. Rissler & McMurry Co. v. Wyoming Highway DepartmentWyoming Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Union Pacific Railroad v. BrowerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1916

3 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