Tate v. State Highway Commission
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBland, J.
This is an action for damages brought on account of the appropriation of certain land, in respect to which plaintiff was a tenant at will, by the State Highway Commission, for a publiehighway. There was a verdict and judgment in favor of plaintiff in the sum of $500 and defendant has appealed..
The sole point raised by the defendant is that the petition ■ fails to state^a cause of action. There was no demurred to the petition in the trial court, but of course, the point that the petition • does not state a cause of action may be raised at any time. [Strauss v. St. Louis Transit Co., 102 Mo.…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Hickman v. City of KansasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- City of Winchester v. RingIllinois Supreme Court · 1924
- St. Louis, Keokuk & Northwestern Railroad v. Knapp-Stout & Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Hayes v. City of AtlantaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
- Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Railroad v. StorySupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- City of St. Louis v. Union Quarry & Construction Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1965
- Millhouse v. Drainage District No. 48 of Dunklin CountyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957
- St. Louis Housing Authority v. BainterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1957
- State Ex Rel. Missouri Highway & Transportation Commission v. HorineSupreme Court of Missouri · 1989
- State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. FoellerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1965
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.