Peatman v. Worthington Drainage District
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
The above case was instituted in the name of Clarence A. Peatman, plaintiff, v. Worthington Drainage District, defendant. After judgment in favor of plaintiff there was an appeal to the Supreme Court and the case was transferred here on jurisdictional grounds. [Peatman v. Worthington Drainage Dist., 168 S.W.2d 57.] Pending said appeal the plaintiff died and thereafter, by stipulation of the parties, the case was revived in the name of Binney Peatman, Admx., plaintiff-respondent.
The issues in the case were framed in the following manner: The petition alleges that plaintiff owns certain…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Mound City Land & Stock Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Houck v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1913
- Ex Parte Keane v. StrodtmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
- Kochtitzky v. St. Louis, Memphis & Southeastern RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Birmingham Drainage District v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Riverside-Quindaro Bend Levee District v. Intercontinental Engineering Manufacturing Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2003
- In Re Fabius River Drainage DistrictMissouri Court of Appeals · 2000