Southwest Missouri Light Co. v. Scheurich
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Newton Circuit Court . — Hon. Henry G. Pepper, Judge. (1) The “Milldam Act” is constitutional. Similar acts have been enacted in nearly all, if not every State in the Union, and such acts have been held to be constitutional by the appellate courts of every State where they have been called in question, with the possible exception of three States. State v. Gilmore, 141 Mo. 506; Head v. Amoskeag Mfg. Co., 113 U. S. 9; Olmstead v. Camp, 33 Conn. 532; 89 Am.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Newton Circuit Court . — Hon. Henry G. Pepper, Judge. (1) The “Milldam Act” is constitutional. Similar acts have been enacted in nearly all, if not every State in the Union, and such acts have been held to be constitutional by the appellate courts of every State where they have been called in question, with the possible exception of three States. State v. Gilmore, 141 Mo. 506; Head v. Amoskeag Mfg. Co., 113 U. S. 9; Olmstead v. Camp, 33 Conn. 532; 89 Am. Dec. 221; Todd v. Austin, 34 Conn. 78; Hawkins v. Lawrence, 8 Blackf. (Ind.) 266; Burnham v. Thompson, 35 La. 421; Yenard v.…
1Opinion of the CourtValliant, J.
Plaintiff is a private corporation organized under article 8, chapter 42, Eevised Statutes 1889, for the purpose of owning and operating gas *240works, electricity works and waterworks to furnish light, power and water to Joplin, Webb City, and neighboring towns and their inhabitants for “hire and compensation.” By this suit the plaintiff seeks to exercise the right of eminent domain as it is conferred in chapter 113, Revised Statutes 1889 (now chap. 131, R. S. 1899) entitled “Mills and Milldams.”
Upon the filing of the petition a writ of ad quod damnum issued and proceedings were had as in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- United States v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- McIntosh v. RankinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
3Cited by19 opinions
- Brown v. GeraldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1905
- Minnesota Canal & Power Co. v. Koochiching Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Casey v. St. Louis Transit Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Coates & Hopkins Realty Co. v. Kansas City Terminal Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1931
- Walling v. Peavy-Wilson Lumber Co.District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1943
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.