Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Gildersleeve

Supreme Court of Missouri

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Gildersleeve

118 S.W. 97, 219 Mo. 202, 1909 Mo. LEXIS 223

CourtSupreme Court of Missouri

DecidedApril 13, 1909

DocketNo. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 118 S.W. 97 (Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Gildersleeve) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Gildersleeve, 118 S.W. 97, 219 Mo. 202, 1909 Mo. LEXIS 223 (Mo. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

GANTT, J. —

The appellant, Gildersleeve, was sentenced by the circuit court of St. Louis, to jail for thirty days for a contempt of court in violating a decree of injunction in said court. Prom that judgment he appealed to the St. Louis Court of Appeals and that court transferred the cause to this court on a constitutional point, to-wit, that section 1617, Revised [203]*203Statutes 1899, was unconstitutional. For the reasons assigned in Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Ry. Co. v. Gildersleeve, in an opinion handed down this day, and reported at page 170 of this Report, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Valliant, C. J., Burgess and Fox, JJ., concur; Lamm, Woodson and Graves, JJ., dissent in an opinion by Lamm, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

GANTT, J. —

The appellant, Gildersleeve, was sentenced by the circuit court of St. Louis, to jail for thirty days for a contempt of court in violating a decree of injunction in said court. Prom that judgment he appealed to the St. Louis Court of Appeals and that court transferred the cause to this court on a constitutional point, to-wit, that section 1617, Revised [203]*203Statutes 1899, was unconstitutional. For the reasons assigned in Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Ry. Co. v. Gildersleeve, in an opinion handed down this day, and reported at page 170 of this Report, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Valliant, C. J., Burgess and Fox, JJ., concur; Lamm, Woodson and Graves, JJ., dissent in an opinion by Lamm, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 S.W. 97, 219 Mo. 202, 1909 Mo. LEXIS 223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-burlington-quincy-railway-co-v-gildersleeve-mo-1909.