Legal Opinion

State Ex Inf. McAllister Ex Rel. Manion v. Albany Drainage District

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 8, 1921PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Quo Warranto. (1) Quo ivarranta is a direct proceeding by the state and is available for nullifying the exercise of legislative power by a municipality, or by the legislative agent, in this case the circuit court. Sec. 2066, R. S. 1919; Sec. 2631, R. S. 1909; State ex inf. Killam v. Colbert, 273 Mo. 198, 209; Black v. Early, 208 Mo. 308; State ex rel. v. Wilson, 216 Mo. 275; State ex rel. v. Gravel Road Co., 187 Mo. 446; State ex rel.

Read the full summary

Quo Warranto. (1) Quo ivarranta is a direct proceeding by the state and is available for nullifying the exercise of legislative power by a municipality, or by the legislative agent, in this case the circuit court. Sec. 2066, R. S. 1919; Sec. 2631, R. S. 1909; State ex inf. Killam v. Colbert, 273 Mo. 198, 209; Black v. Early, 208 Mo. 308; State ex rel. v. Wilson, 216 Mo. 275; State ex rel. v. Gravel Road Co., 187 Mo. 446; State ex rel. Brown v. West-port, 108 Mo. 582; State ex rel. v. Westport, 116 Mo. 582; Lehigh P. & T. Co. v. Town of Lehigh, 156 Iowa, 387, 398. (2) To nullify the attempted…

1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.

The Attorney-General, at the relation of certain individuals, has instituted this proceeding by quo warranto, alleging that the respondent is unlawfully exercising the franchises and privileges of a drainage district over the lands of the individual relators. The information admits the corporate character of the respondent as a drainage district under the laws of the State, hut alleges that in-its attempt to extend its boundaries and exercise authority over the relator’s lands it is exercising powers not authorized by its charter.

The respondent was organized as the Albany Drainage District…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Munn v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Houck v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  3. Houck v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1913
  4. City of Peru v. BearssIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  5. State ex rel. McWilliams v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1916

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Setters v. LeeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923
  2. State Ex Rel. McKittrick v. American Colony InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1935
  3. State Ex Rel. McKittrick v. Missouri Public Service Commission, Laclede Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1943
  4. State ex inf. Graham ex rel. Mississippi County ex rel. Bishop v. HurleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1976
  5. Bohannon v. Camden Bend Drainage DistrictMissouri Court of Appeals · 1948

7 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