Home/Supreme Court of Missouri/Moore v. Farmer

Moore v. Farmer

56 S.W. 493, 156 Mo. 33, 1900 Mo. LEXIS 275
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedMarch 30, 1900
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 56 S.W. 493 (Moore v. Farmer) 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
Moore v. Farmer, 56 S.W. 493, 156 Mo. 33, 1900 Mo. LEXIS 275 (Mo. 1900).

Opinion

MARSHALL, J.

Respondent’s statement of the facts in this case is as follows:

“This is an action in ejectment brought by appellant Moore in the Callaway Circuit Court to recover possession of 55.27 acres of land in Callaway county, which had formed in the Missouri river south and west of the town or village of Cedar City, and lying across and slightly up-the river from Jefferson City. In 1833 all land lying in the northwest fractional quarter of section 16, township 44, range 11 in Callaway county was bought by one W. B. Scott. At that time the river ran over a large part of this'quarter section, [37]*37there being in fact bnt 69.56 acres of the 160 uncovered by the river at this time. Between the date of purchase by Scott in 1833 and the year 1871 the river further encroached upon this land until there was probably not more than 40 acres left. In this year all that part of this fractional northwest quarter section lying east of. Cedar • Greet passed into the hands of the Cedar City Land Co., a corporation formed for the purpose of laying out and putting upon the market lands embraced within the original limits of the village of Cedar City. The village was laid out as shown by the plats attached to appellant’s and respondent’s abstracts — Water street, 75 feet wide, ran parallel with the river and so far as the evidence and the plats disclose, the outer or southern line of this street was parallel and coincident with the then north bank of the Mo. Eiver, or at least was 'as neai-lv so as the formation and slight irregularities of the bank would permit. Lofe facing the river and abutting upon Water street were sold by the town company to various persons. Afterwards, but at just what time the evidence does not disclose, the river bank at this point began to wash away until Water street was entirely gone, likewise a considerable portion of the town adjacent thereto, and the river bank had reached the point marked by the heavy dotted line on the following plat:
[38]*38

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

Related

Sibley v. Eagle Marine Industries, Inc.
607 S.W.2d 431 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1980)
Moore v. Rone
355 S.W.2d 398 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1962)
Conran v. Girvin
341 S.W.2d 75 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1960)
Dunlap v. Hartman
338 S.W.2d 10 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1960)
Hamburg Realty Company v. Woods
327 S.W.2d 138 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1959)
Peterson v. City of St. Joseph
156 S.W.2d 691 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1941)
Hecker v. Bleish
3 S.W.2d 1008 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1928)
Dumm v. Cole County
287 S.W. 445 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1926)
Schneider v. Schneider
224 S.W. 1 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1920)
Bouchard v. Abrahamsen
118 P. 233 (California Supreme Court, 1911)
Polack v. Steinke
139 S.W. 538 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1911)
Fowler v. Wood
85 P. 763 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1906)
Frank v. Goddin
91 S.W. 1057 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1906)
Chinn v. Naylor
81 S.W. 1109 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1904)
Kirton v. Bull
68 S.W. 927 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
Bozarth v. Lincoln Legion of Honor
67 S.W. 679 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1902)
DeLassus v. Faherty
164 Mo. 361 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1901)
West Missouri Land Co. v. Thompson
57 S.W. 1042 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 S.W. 493, 156 Mo. 33, 1900 Mo. LEXIS 275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-farmer-mo-1900.