State ex inf. Barker v. Koeln
Supreme Court of Missouri
Quo warranto, (1) The burden is on the respondent to establish his right to the office. State ex rel. v. McCann, 88 Mo. 386; State ex rel. v. Powles, 136 Mo. 376. (2) (a) The legal requirement that collectors should be elected in 1906, and every four years thereafter, is, substantially, a direction that no election for that office shall be held in any intervening year.
Read the full summary
Quo warranto, (1) The burden is on the respondent to establish his right to the office. State ex rel. v. McCann, 88 Mo. 386; State ex rel. v. Powles, 136 Mo. 376. (2) (a) The legal requirement that collectors should be elected in 1906, and every four years thereafter, is, substantially, a direction that no election for that office shall be held in any intervening year. State ex rel. v. Roach, 269 Mo. 500. The designation by the statute of the years in which collectors are to be elected was intended to prevent collectors being elected in presidential years. State ex rel. v. Roach, 269 Mo. 500.…
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
— This is a proceeding in quo warranto instituted in this court hy the Attorney-General to oust respondent from the office of Collector of the Revenue of the city of St. Louis.
*180The facts of the case, concerning which there is now no dispute, are correctly stated in his brief, by the learned Attorney-General, as follows:
“The first count of the petition is in the customary form in quo warranto.
“The second count informs the court and alleges that the respondent received the highest number of votes for the office of collector at a certain election held in St. Louis in April, 1914 (1913), but that…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ewing v. HoblitzelleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- State ex inf. Hadley v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- State ex rel. Hawes v. MasonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Peterson v. Chicago & Alton Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1915
- City of St. Louis v. KlausmeierSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lovins v. City of St. Louis.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1935
- Preisler v. HaydenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1958
- State ex rel. McDaniel v. SchrammSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
- State ex rel. American Manufacturing Co. v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
- In Re East Bottoms Drainage Levee DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.