City of St. Louis v. St. Louis Gas-Light Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Adams, J. The compensation of the receiver should be paid out of the fund. —French v. Gifford, 31 Iowa, 428; Mabry v. Brown, 12 Heisk. 597; Cowdry v. Railroad Co., 1 Woods, 331. cited: The State ex rel. v. Gambs, 68 Mo. 289; Rev. Stats., sects. 990, 991, 3662.
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court re-taxing the amount which had been allowed as compensation to the receiver appointed in this case, as costs against the plaintiff. The question arises in this way: On the first day of June, 1876, the circuit court, on a final hearing of this cause, adjudged the equities in favor of the plaintiff, and, among other orders, made the following: “And the court doth further adjudge and decree that the defendant, the St. Louis Gas-Light Company, be forever enjoined and restrained from manufacturing or selling gas in the city of St. Louis or its…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- City of St. Louis v. St. Louis Gaslight Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- State ex rel. Fichtenkamm v. GambsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
- City of St. Louis v. St. Louis Gas-Light Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1878
- Snead v. WegmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- Morse v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- McAnrow v. MartinIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
- Frick v. FritzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Gieselmann v. StegemanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1971
- First National Bank of Laramie v. CookWyoming Supreme Court · 1904
- Hickey v. Parrot Silver & Copper Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1905
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.