Neenan v. Donoghue
Supreme Court of Missouri
Jlppeal from Buchanan Court of Common Pleas.' This was a suit commenced in the Circuit Court of Buchanan county to recover a bill for macadamizing and other improvements done by plaintiff in front of and adjoining property owned by defendant. The work was done by virtue of an alleged contract with the city of St. Joseph, made in pursuance of the charter and ordinances.
Read the full summary
Jlppeal from Buchanan Court of Common Pleas.' This was a suit commenced in the Circuit Court of Buchanan county to recover a bill for macadamizing and other improvements done by plaintiff in front of and adjoining property owned by defendant. The work was done by virtue of an alleged contract with the city of St. Joseph, made in pursuance of the charter and ordinances. The petition set forth the charter of the city and ordinances directing the work to be done, and the contract, which contains this clause: “ Said work to be paid for when the same is accepted by the board of public works of the…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
The instruction asked by the plaintiff should have been given, and those presenting an opposite view by the defendant should have been refused. The contract entered into by the plaintiff to do the work on the street, for which the defendant’s lot was chargeable, provided that payment should be made when the same was accepted by the board of public works. The board was composed of three men, one of whom examined the work and accepted it, and the others refused and neglected to make any examination, and had nothing to do with its acceptance. The non-action or default of some of the members…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Rude v. MitchellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- Chapman v. Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- McNees v. Southern InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
- Hoyt v. BuderSupreme Court of Missouri · 1928
- Kinnerk v. Philadelphia Ball ClubMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902