State ex rel. Proctor v. Walker
Supreme Court of Missouri
Mandamus. (1) The statute makes direct provision for refunding such bonds as these. Sec. 5157, R. S. 1899, as amended by laws 1901, p. 52. Such statute authorizes refunding bonds. 1 Abbott on Municipal Corporations, secs. 172, 173; Tiedeman on Municipal Corporations, sec. 197; Simonton on Municipal Bonds, secs. 59, 126, 128; 2 Beach on Public Corporations, secs. 928, 929; City of Huron v. Bank, 49 L. R. A. 534; 2 Smith on Modern Law Mun.
Read the full summary
Mandamus. (1) The statute makes direct provision for refunding such bonds as these. Sec. 5157, R. S. 1899, as amended by laws 1901, p. 52. Such statute authorizes refunding bonds. 1 Abbott on Municipal Corporations, secs. 172, 173; Tiedeman on Municipal Corporations, sec. 197; Simonton on Municipal Bonds, secs. 59, 126, 128; 2 Beach on Public Corporations, secs. 928, 929; City of Huron v. Bank, 49 L. R. A. 534; 2 Smith on Modern Law Mun. Corp., sec. 993. The refunding bonds neither create nor increase the debt. They only change the form of the debt to the advantage of the district. Board of…
1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.
— This is an original proceeding in this court in which the relators ask the court to issue its writ of mandamus commanding and requiring respondents to sign and execute certain refunding bonds as ordered by the school board of the school district of the city of Monroe in the State of Missouri. The facts upon which relators predicate their right to the writ sought in this proceeding are thus stated in the petition :
“Now at this day come relators and leave of court first being had, file their first amended petition and respectfully represent and show to the court that they, along with the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ewing v. HoblitzelleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- East St. Louis v. AmySupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Lynch v. MurphySupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- State v. AddingtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1882
- City of East St. Louis v. People ex rel. GundlachIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Consolidated School District No. 8 v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1938
- Excise Board v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
- State ex rel. Wayne County v. HackmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
- Citrus Growers' Development Ass'n v. Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'nArizona Supreme Court · 1928
- Authorizing Issuance of Funding Bonds Ex Rel. Consolidated School District No. 4 v. DaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.