Watson v. County of St. Louis
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. On the 10th of October, 1851, the respondent filed a petition in the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, stating that on the 20th of August, 1851, he paid the sum of one hundred and forty one 67-100 dollars for rent of rooms, from the 13th of March to the 13th of August, 1851, for the use of the officers and suitors in the Court of the Law Commissioner of St. Louis county, and that during the time above mentioned, he was the Law…
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. On the 10th of October, 1851, the respondent filed a petition in the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, stating that on the 20th of August, 1851, he paid the sum of one hundred and forty one 67-100 dollars for rent of rooms, from the 13th of March to the 13th of August, 1851, for the use of the officers and suitors in the Court of the Law Commissioner of St. Louis county, and that during the time above mentioned, he was the Law Commissioner of St. Louis county; that the County Court of St. Louis county failed and refused to provide any rooms or place…
1Opinion of the CourtGamble, Judge
This case seems to require a short history of the Law Com*95missioner’s Court, wbicb bas gradually grown up from an officer appointed to take depositions, to the dignity of a court of record.
In the revised code of 1845, 690, we find the original act for the appointment of a law commissioner for St. Louis county, whose duty was the taking of depositions, and who was vested by the act with “the sole and exclusive power of taking depositions, to be read in evidence in the several courts of record in St. Louis county.” The 4th section makes it “the duty of the said commissioner to have some…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lackey v. SeibertSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
- State ex rel. Williams v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1908
- Hall v. DeArmondMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891