Legal Opinion

Kurz v. Turley

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided May 9, 1893PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from the Pike Circuit Court. — Hon. E. M. Hughes, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtBond, J.

— This action was a trespass by the defendants in removing the fencing inclosing a growing crop, on the plaintiff’s land, thereby causing damage to the crop. The defense was that the fence was removed by the road overseer and other defendants, because it" obstructed a public road. There was a judgment for the respondent and an appeal taken.

The only error assigned is that the court instructed the jury on the theory that the road overseer under the statutes existing at the time this cause of action accrued (Eevised Statutes, 1889, sections 7807 and 7827) had no power nor right as such overseer…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Faires v. BuhlerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
  2. Erdbruegger v. MeierMissouri Court of Appeals · 1883
  3. Warner v. MorinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1850
  4. Stevens v. GwathmeySupreme Court of Missouri · 1845
  5. Dobyns v. RiceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. City of St. Louis v. Senter Commission Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1937
  2. State ex rel. Rucker v. FeitzMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API