City of Poplar Bluff v. Hill
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Butler Circuit Court. — Hon. J. L. Fort, Judge. (1) The city had the right to enact section 682 of its Revised Ordinances. Sec. 5872, R. S. 1899. State v. Muir, 86 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Butler Circuit Court. — Hon. J. L. Fort, Judge. (1) The city had the right to enact section 682 of its Revised Ordinances. Sec. 5872, R. S. 1899. State v. Muir, 86 Mo. App. 642. (2) The city has a right to appeal from a verdict and judgment in favor of defendant in the police court: Section 5805, R. S. 1899; Kansas City v. Clark, 68 Mb. 588; Kansas City v. Cutback, 68 Mo. 641; Kansas City v. White, 69 Mo. 28; St. Louis v. Knox, 74 Mo. 81; Ex Parte Holl-wedell, 74 Mo. 401; Town of Carrollton v. Rhomberg, 78 Mo. 549; Euerth v. Anderson, 87 Mo. 356.
1Opinion of the CourtBarclay, J.
This action was brought before the recorder or police judge to enforce a penalty defined by the following ordinance of the city of Poplar Bluff, Missouri:
“Section 682. — If two or more persons, in any public place, within the limits of this city, voluntarily, or by agreement engage in any fight, or use any blows or violence toward each other in any angry or quarrelsome manner, or do each other any mischief, or if any person shall assault another and strike him, in any public place, to the terror or disturbance of others, the person or persons so offending shall be deemed guilty of an affray,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gannon v. Laclede Gas Light Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- City of Kansas v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
- Kansas City v. NealSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Seehorn v. American National BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- State v. MuirSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pierce Loan Co. v. KillianMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- City of Carthage v. BirdMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910