Houck v. Little River Drainage District
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Cape Girardeau Circuit Court. — Hon. Charles B. Faris, Judge. (1) “The constitutionality of a law is to be tested not by what has been done but what may by its authority be done.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cape Girardeau Circuit Court. — Hon. Charles B. Faris, Judge. (1) “The constitutionality of a law is to be tested not by what has been done but what may by its authority be done.” Stuart v. Palmer, 74 N. Y. 183; Agens v. Mayor, 37 N. J. L. 420; Norwood v. Baker, 172 U. S. 269. (2) Sec. 5538, E. S. 1909, violates sections 21 and 30 of article 2 of the State Constitution and amendment 5 and section 1 of amendment 14 of the United States Constitution by depriving plaintiffs of property for public use without compensation apd without due process of law. (a) Due process of law includes…
1Opinion of the Court
BBOWN, C.
This is a suit by the owners of lands in the defendant drainage district, which was incorporated by the judgment of the Butler County Circuit Court, November 30, 1907, under the provisions of article 3, chapter 122, Bevised Statutes 1899, as amended by the Act of April 8, 1905. The object of the suit *382is to enjoin the collection of a tax of twenty-five cents per acre upon the lands of plaintiffs, in common with other lands of the district, levied under the provisions of the Act of June 1, 1909, which is now section 5538, Revised Statutes 1909. The defendants demurred to the petition,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Munn v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Thurlow v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1847
- State ex rel. Applegate v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Egyptian Levee Co. v. HardinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
- Mound City Land & Stock Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Lainhart v. CattsSupreme Court of Florida · 1917
- Spitcaufsky v. HattenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1944
- Bussiere's Admisnistrator v. SaymanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1914
- Anderson v. Inter-River Drainage & Levee DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1925
- Birmingham Drainage District v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.