Givens v. McIlroy
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the PiJce Circuit Court. — Hon. Reuben F. Roy, Judge. There can be no question as to the right of plaintiffs to maintain this action. In Oummings v. St. Louis, 90 Mo. 259, • which was a suit to enjoin the city from opening a street, the court held that plaintiff could maintain the action although his property was three blocks from the proposed street.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the PiJce Circuit Court. — Hon. Reuben F. Roy, Judge. There can be no question as to the right of plaintiffs to maintain this action. In Oummings v. St. Louis, 90 Mo. 259, • which was a suit to enjoin the city from opening a street, the court held that plaintiff could maintain the action although his property was three blocks from the proposed street. As also upholding the doctrine that plaintiffs may maintain the action we cite the following: Rutherford v. Tylor, 38 Mo. 316; Price y. Thompson, 48 Mo. 361; High on Injunction [2 Ed.], sec. 1553; Sheedy v. Press Brick Works, 25 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
The petition is as follows:
“John M. G-ivens and William M. Waters, Plaintiffs,
vs.
“John W. Mellroy, Eugene W. Stark, J. R. S. McCune and-Andrew J. Eorgey, Defendants.
“To the Honorable Reiiben E. Roy, Judge of the Tenth ■Judicial District of Missouri:
“The plaintiffs respectfully represent and show to the •court that they axe taxpaying citizens of Calumet township, Pike county, Missouri. That the first three named defendants are the judges of the county court of Pike county, Missouri. That the fourth and last named defendant Andrew J. Eorgey is a citizen of said township, county and state, and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Glasgow v. St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Glaessner v. Anheuser-Busch Brewing Ass'nSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- Haynes v. County Court of Cass CountyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Hodson v. WalkerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- State v. SchenkelMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908