State ex rel. Wabash Railroad v. Bland
Supreme Court of Missouri
Certiorari. This court has ample jurisdiction to hear and determine the question in issue in this controversy, and certiorari is the proper proceeding where, as in this instance, a Federal question is involved, and where the appellate court has refused to transfer the cause to this court.
Read the full summary
Certiorari. This court has ample jurisdiction to hear and determine the question in issue in this controversy, and certiorari is the proper proceeding where, as in this instance, a Federal question is involved, and where the appellate court has refused to transfer the cause to this court. Constitution, art 6, secs. 3 and 12; Rector v. Price, 1 Mo. 198; Owen v. Andrew Co., 49 Mo. 372; State ex rel. v. Dowling, 50 Mo. 134; Railroad v. State B’d of Equal’n, 64 Mo. 294; Railroad v. Young, 96 Mo. 39; State ex rel. v. Switzler, 143 Mo. 287. There is no question of the power of the Supreme Court of…
1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, J.
— This is an original proceeding, by certiorari, whereby the cause of Charles E. Pearce vs. the Wabash Railroad Company, was removed from the St. Louis Court of Appeals to this court, after final judgment in that court in favor of the plaintiff. The petition for the writ of certiorari was based upon the allegation that the St. Louis Court of Appeals\had exceeded its jurisdiction or was without jurisdiction, because “the validity of a treaty or statute of or authority exercised under the Hnited States is drawn in question” in the case of Pearce vs. the railroad aforesaid, and that the…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Chandler v. Chicago & Alton RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1913
- Kinlen v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Riggs v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- State ex rel. United Railways Co. v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1914
- McKenzie v. United Railways Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.