Legal Opinion

Houck v. Little River Drainage District

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided September 17, 1938PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Plaintiff filed petition under Section 1347, Revised Statutes 1929 (Mo. Stat. Ann., sec. 1347, p. 1550), to have damages ascertained for the alleged wrongful taking of her land by defendant. A demurrer to the petition was sustained, the petition dismissed and plaintiff appealed.

Plaintiff alleged that the taking of her land in the manner alleged violates her constitutional rights under Section 21 (taking or damaging private property for public use) and Section 30 (due process clause), Article 2, Constitution of Missouri. Also, it is alleged that plaintiff's rights (due process and equal…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Cranfill v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
  2. State ex rel. McWilliams v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1916
  3. State Ex Rel. Goodloe v. WurdemanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1920
  4. Custer v. KroegerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1926
  5. State ex rel. Caruthers v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Page v. Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1964
  2. Bohannon v. Camden Bend Drainage DistrictMissouri Court of Appeals · 1948
  3. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. NewinghamMissouri Court of Appeals · 1965
  4. Lemmon v. Continental Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1943
  5. Se-Ma-No Electric Cooperative v. City of MansfieldMissouri Court of Appeals · 1959

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API