State ex informatione Keller v. County Court of Buchanan County
Missouri Court of Appeals
Original Proceedings by Certiorari. (1) The application in this case was not filed at the time of presenting of the petition, and there is no filing mark upon it to show when it was filed. It does not comply with the law, as amended at the 1907 session of the General Assembly, for the following reasons: First, that it does not state who is or who is to be the owner or owners of the said dramshop.
Read the full summary
Original Proceedings by Certiorari. (1) The application in this case was not filed at the time of presenting of the petition, and there is no filing mark upon it to show when it was filed. It does not comply with the law, as amended at the 1907 session of the General Assembly, for the following reasons: First, that it does not state who is or who is to be the owner or owners of the said dramshop. Second, That it does not state that the applicant is not disqualified under any law of this state to conduct a dramshop. Third, for the reason that it is not verified by the oath or affidavit of the…
1Opinion of the Court
BROAJDDüS, P. J.
This is a proceeding by cer-tiorari for a review of the action of the county court of Buchanan county in granting to Charles C. Keene a saloon license. The judges of the court are made respondents.
The petition sets forth that on the 3rd day of July, 1908, there was filed in the office of the clerk of said county court the petition of said Keene to conduct a dramshop in the village of Winthrop in Rush township in said county; and that after said petition was placed on file in said office the hearing thereon was continued from time to time until the 8th of August, 1908, at which…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State ex rel. Dalton v. BakerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- State v. PateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
- State v. HughesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
- Burkharth v. StephensMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- State ex rel. Waggoner v. SeibertMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902