Givens v. Van Studdiford
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) The petition in this case does not set np or con* tain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. This is a private action for a public nuisance, and there is no allegation or averment that the plaintiff had ever sustained any injury therefrom that was not common to the public at large, or which was not participated in by the public as well as himself.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) The petition in this case does not set np or con* tain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. This is a private action for a public nuisance, and there is no allegation or averment that the plaintiff had ever sustained any injury therefrom that was not common to the public at large, or which was not participated in by the public as well as himself. It is an inflexible rule of law, that no single individual can maintain a suit, either in law or equity, to enjoin or abate a public and common nuisance, or to recover damages for himself…
1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.
— Some of the questions presented by ibis record were considered by the court of appeals on the first appeal. 4 Mo. App. 498. The opinion then filed was approved by this court. 72 Mo. 129. Questions not then •considered are also now presented in argument and in •elaborate briefs.
1. It is first insisted that there is no bill of exceptions of which the court can take notice for the purpose •of disposing of the case on .its merits. The cause was tried at one term of the circuit court, when a motion for a new trial was filed in due time. The motion stood over for two terms, was called up and…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Finney v. BerrySupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Henze v. St. Louis, Kansas City & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- State v. ClarkeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Woodyear v. SchaeferCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1881
- Dickson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Beer v. MartelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- Bragg v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Childs v. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Beetschen v. Shell Pipe Line Corp.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1952
- Consumer Contact Co. v. State Department of RevenueSupreme Court of Missouri · 1980
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.