City of Sedalia ex rel. Taylor v. Dogherty

Supreme Court of Missouri

City of Sedalia ex rel. Taylor v. Dogherty

104 S.W. 22, 206 Mo. 372, 1907 Mo. LEXIS 159

DecidedJuly 13, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 104 S.W. 22 (City of Sedalia ex rel. Taylor v. Dogherty) 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

City of Sedalia ex rel. Taylor v. Dogherty, 104 S.W. 22, 206 Mo. 372, 1907 Mo. LEXIS 159 (Mo. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

GRAVES, J.

This is one of the three cases argued and submitted together. The case of City of Sedalia ex rel. Taylor v. David H. Smith, ante, page 346, in which we have gone over both the facts and the law, controls the disposition of this case. There is but one difference either in fact or law between the Smith case and this case. In this case, the defendant, Dogherty, signed the' following petition:

“We who are residents on Fourth street, in the city of Sedalia, and who have petitioned the city council to pave said street, hereby desire to signify to the council that we want said paving on a six inch concrete base and the character of paving as indicated opposite our respective names:”

Defendant Smith, in his case, had signed nothing. It is urged in the present case that Dogherty is estopped by reason of this act and cannot now question the taxhill. This presents a very nice question, but in the view we have taken of the Smith case, a consideration thereof would be useless. Following the Smith case, this case will be reversed and remanded to be [373]*373proceeded with as indicated in onr opinion in the Smith ease.

All concnr.

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

GRAVES, J.

This is one of the three cases argued and submitted together. The case of City of Sedalia ex rel. Taylor v. David H. Smith, ante, page 346, in which we have gone over both the facts and the law, controls the disposition of this case. There is but one difference either in fact or law between the Smith case and this case. In this case, the defendant, Dogherty, signed the' following petition:

“We who are residents on Fourth street, in the city of Sedalia, and who have petitioned the city council to pave said street, hereby desire to signify to the council that we want said paving on a six inch concrete base and the character of paving as indicated opposite our respective names:”

Defendant Smith, in his case, had signed nothing. It is urged in the present case that Dogherty is estopped by reason of this act and cannot now question the taxhill. This presents a very nice question, but in the view we have taken of the Smith case, a consideration thereof would be useless. Following the Smith case, this case will be reversed and remanded to be [373]*373proceeded with as indicated in onr opinion in the Smith ease.

All concnr.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 S.W. 22, 206 Mo. 372, 1907 Mo. LEXIS 159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-sedalia-ex-rel-taylor-v-dogherty-mo-1907.