Legal Opinion

Bohannon v. Camden Bend Drainage District

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 9, 1948PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBland, J.

This action is brought to enjoin respondents from constructing and maintaining a ditch, and from lowering the level of a private lake, or otherwise interfering with appellants’ property, and from carrying out a certain plan of reclamation. Defendants, respondents here, filed a motion to dismiss said action on the ground that the petition did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against defendants, and failed to state a claim upon which any relief may be granted. The motion was sustained by the trial court. From the judgment thereupon rendered in defendants’ favor,…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Rude v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  2. Mound City Land & Stock Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
  3. Morrison v. MoreySupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
  4. Richards Brick Co. v. WrightMissouri Court of Appeals · 1935
  5. Anderson v. Inter-River Drainage & Levee DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1925

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Page v. Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1964
  2. Kleban v. MorrisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1952
  3. Millhouse v. Drainage District No. 48 of Dunklin CountyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957
  4. Kansas City v. MathisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1966
  5. Rebel v. Big Tarkio Drainage District of Holt CityMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API