Reading v. Chandler

192 S.W. 94, 269 Mo. 589, 1917 Mo. LEXIS 123
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided January 29, 1917·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinions

GRAVES, C. J.

This ease reached us from the St. Louis Court of Appeals, the certification being upon the ground that title to real estate is so involved as to invoke our jurisdiction rather than theirs.

The further salient facts are, that some time prior to this action Daniel C. Chandler, one of the defendants herein, presented a petition to the county court of Pike County, praying for a private -road of necessity over the lands of Luther F. Sparks and Lois E. Reading.' The prayer of his petition was granted and the private road duly established, but not until Sparks and Reading had invoked the judgment of the St. Louis Court of Appeals upon at least one question therein. [Chandler v. Reading et al., 129 Mo. App. 63.]

After the establishment of this private road there was an attempt to open a public road to Chandler’s land some half mile distance north of the private way. In this Lois E. Reading, L. F. Sparks, and Dr. D. M. Pearson appear to have been the leading spirits. A plat in defendant’s brief shows the situation of the matters in dispute, and for the exactness of the information which it furnishes we insert it here.

[594] 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

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

Reading v. Chandler, 192 S.W. 94, 269 Mo. 589, 1917 Mo. LEXIS 123 (Mo. 1917).

192 S.W. 94 (Reading v. Chandler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rogers v. Brockland
889 S.W.2d 827 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1994)
Szombathy v. Ferguson-Florissant Reorganized School District R-2
675 S.W.2d 24 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1984)
Evans v. Mansfield
364 S.W.2d 548 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1963)
Welch v. Shipman
210 S.W.2d 1008 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1948)
Mitchell v. Nichols
52 S.W.2d 885 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1932)