State ex rel. Blakeman v. Hays
Supreme Court of Missouri
Mandamus. — On motion for a re-hea/ring. I. A re-hearing is prayed. — Because the court overlooked the fact that the warrant was drawn and delivered after the passage of the act creating the “ Military Fund.” II.
Read the full summary
Mandamus. — On motion for a re-hea/ring. I. A re-hearing is prayed. — Because the court overlooked the fact that the warrant was drawn and delivered after the passage of the act creating the “ Military Fund.” II. Because the decision of the court is in conflict with the cases of Fremont vs. The United States, 2 Ct. of Cl" R. 461, and Theodore Adams vs. The United States,2 Ct. of 01. R., 70. Filed no brief on this motion, but submitted the case on his •former argument and brief.
1Opinion of the CourtEwing, Judge
At the October term, 1872, of this court, respondent filed a motion for judgment on the replication of the relator, on the following grounds substantially, namely: That it is alleged in respondent’s return, and admitted by the relator in his reply, that the warrant was issued in payment of powder, and that said powder, if purchased at all, was so purchased on the 26th day of April, 1861, and prior to the act May 11, 1861, whereby the military fund upon which said warrant was drawn was created ; that it is alleged by respondent that the Legislature of the State never ratified the supposed…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Delafield v. StateNew York Supreme Court · 1841
- State v. Bank of the State of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
3Cited by33 opinions
- Whiteside v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Hawkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- State v. GrantSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Leete v. State Bank of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Minter v. Bradstreet Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1903
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.