State ex rel. Vickery v. Wofford
Supreme Court of Missouri
Mandamus. • (1) The trial court had no option, and no discretion, to grant or refuse a change of venue. Upon filing of the-proper affidavits, the duty of the judge to grant the change of venue was ministerial, not judicial. R. S. 1889, secs. 4152, 4153, 4154, 4155, 4156. The statute has been changed since decisions were rendered in Ex parte Chambers, 10 Mo.
Read the full summary
Mandamus. • (1) The trial court had no option, and no discretion, to grant or refuse a change of venue. Upon filing of the-proper affidavits, the duty of the judge to grant the change of venue was ministerial, not judicial. R. S. 1889, secs. 4152, 4153, 4154, 4155, 4156. The statute has been changed since decisions were rendered in Ex parte Chambers, 10 Mo. App. 240; State v. O’Bourlce, 55 Mo. 440; State v. Garesche, 65 Mo. 480, at which times the application for a change was addressed to the trial court as a judicial question. . R. S. 1879, sec. 1859. Ex parte Chambers, supra. Since the…
1Opinion of the CourtG-antt, P. J.
At the September term, 1893, of the criminal court of Jackson county, at Kansas City, the relator, Horace N. Vickery, was indicted for embezzlement and was duly arraigned. He then filed his affidavit, supported by the affidavits of two others, averring prejudice in the minds of the inhabitants of Kansas City against him and asked for a change of venue to Independence in said county, under and by virtue of section 13 of the special act creating said court. R. *379S. 1889, p. 2207. The change was granted, and the cause promptly removed to Independence.
At the November term, 1893, of the said court…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. HayesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
3Cited by4 opinions
- Felts v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- State ex rel. Hannon v. WoodsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900
- Leslie v. G. W. Chase & Son Mercantile Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Swasey v. DoyleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901