State ex rel. Dawson v. St. Louis Court of Appeals
Supreme Court of Missouri
Prohibition. (1) The supreme court has a general superintending control over all inferior courts. It also has the power to issue all original remedial writs, and to hear and determine the same. Const., art. 6, sec. 3. (2) The court of appeals had no authority to attach a condition to the exercise of its appellate power, requiring the petitioner .to comply with an order not before the court.
Read the full summary
Prohibition. (1) The supreme court has a general superintending control over all inferior courts. It also has the power to issue all original remedial writs, and to hear and determine the same. Const., art. 6, sec. 3. (2) The court of appeals had no authority to attach a condition to the exercise of its appellate power, requiring the petitioner .to comply with an order not before the court. (3) The actual wrong complained of, and for which relief is sought here, is the judgment nisi of the court of appeals, requiring him to pay into said court, or into the lower court, about eleven hundred…
1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.
This is an original proceeding in this court by prohibition against the judges of the St. Louis court of appeals, to restrain them from making a threatened order or judgment in a cause now pending in that court, on an appeal from the circuit court of St. Louis *219county, wherein the present relator, James Dawson, is plaintiff, and Eva Dawson is defendant and the appellant.
The history of that case, so far as important to a disposition of this one, is this: James Dawson commenced the suit, which was for divorce, in February, 1885. The circuit court, on the first of June, 1885, made the following…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State ex rel. Gercke v. SeddonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- State ex rel. Clarkson v. St. Louis Court of AppealsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- State ex rel. Morse v. BurckharttSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- State v. RaySupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
- Crews v. MooneySupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Haskell v. HustonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- In re MorganSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- State ex rel. Kochtitzky v. RileySupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Ex Parte LohmullerTexas Supreme Court · 1910
- State ex rel. Johnson v. WithrowSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.