Legal Opinion

Hamilton v. St. Louis County Court

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1851PublishedCited by 22 opinions

Read the full summary

MTÍTION FOR MANDAMUS. i. The following is an account presented try Alexander Hamilton, judge of the circuit rourt, to the county of St. Louis for payment. “The county of St. Louis to Alexander Hamilton, Dr: For amount of compensation allowed hsm out of the county treasury of St. Louis county for his services as judge of the 9tb judicial circuit. Mo., from the 1st day of August, A. I)., ■ 851, to November 2nd, 1851, pursuant to (he act of the General Assembly, «milled can act to increase the salaries of judges in St. Louis county,5 approved March 3d, 1851. No fees, having been collected bv him…

1Opinion of the CourtGamble, J.

In these cases the relators, judges of the circuit and common pleas courts, of the county of St. Louis, having presented their accounts to the county court of said county, for the additional compensation provided for in the act of the 3d of March last, and the county having refused to allow the accounts, have obtained writs.of conditional mandamus to that court. The county court return to those writs, as the reason for their refusal to allow the accounts of the said judges and order the same to be paid out of the county treasury.

1. That the act leaves the amount of additional compensation, to…

2Cited by22 opinions

State ex rel. Police Commissioners v. County CourtSupreme Court of Missouri · 1864
County Court v. GriswoldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
State v. Bowen & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1915
Attorney General ex rel. Moreland v. Common CouncilMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
State v. McCartyAlabama Court of Appeals · 1912

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