State ex rel. Patterson v. McReynolds

61 Mo. 203
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by26 cases

This text of 61 Mo. 203 (State ex rel. Patterson v. McReynolds) 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
State ex rel. Patterson v. McReynolds, 61 Mo. 203 (Mo. 1875).

Opinion

Y oríes, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

’This is an- information in the nature of a quo toarranlo filed in the Bates circuit court by the circuit attorney of said circuit, to inquire into the authority by which the defendants claimed to exercise and were exercising the powers and duties of trustees of the town of Butler, in said county.

The petition was'filed on the 21st day of June, 1873, and averred that the defendants, without the authority of law, were exercising and usurping the rights and duties of trustees of the “ Inhabitants of the Town of Butler,” in the county [205]*205of Rates, in the State of Missouri, and were passing ordinances levying taxes, etc., without any legal authority therefor. It is also averred by the petition that there is no such incorporated town or municipality as the “Inhabitants of the Town of Butler.”

The defendants admit, by their answer, that they are exercising and performing the duties of the office of trustees of the “Inhabitants of the Town of Butler,” in Bates county, Missouri. They aver that said town had been and was duly incorporated under and by virtue of the 41st chapter of the General Statutes of Missouri, and that they had been duly elected as trustees for said town and had qualified as such trustees, and were lawfully exercising the duties imposed on them as such trustees, setting out in detail all and each of the acts done by the inhabitants of said town, and of the county court of said county, in the incorporation of said town, as well as their election to the office of trustees for said town.

The facts of the case, as shown by the records, are substantially as follows: On the 12th day of June, 1872, the town of Butler, in Bates county, as the same was laid out in lots, streets, etc., and a plat thereof filed in the recorder’s office of said county, comprised between two hundred and fifty and three hundred acres of land, and was of an irregular shape. On said day two-thirds of the inhabitants of said town and of a portion of the adjoining country, containing in all about twelve hundred acres of land, petitioned the county court of Bates county to incorporate said district of country and the inhabitants thereof (which included the platted town of Butler), the metes and bounds of which were described in said petition. The boundaries of the country so described, as well of the said town as laid out and platted, will be' more fully shown by the following map or plat thereof.

[206]*206 vvQb5c2

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

Related

In re Incorporation of the Village of Lone Jack
471 S.W.2d 513 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1971)
State v. Champ
393 S.W.2d 516 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1965)
Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co. v. City of Silver Grove
249 S.W.2d 520 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1952)
Roach v. City of Tuscumbia
52 So. 2d 141 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1950)
State Ex Inf. Otto v. Hyde
296 S.W. 775 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1927)
State Ex Inf. Pulley v. Scott
270 S.W. 382 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1925)
Town of North Judson v. Chicago & Erie Railroad
126 N.E. 323 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1920)
State ex rel. Coyne v. Buerman
172 S.W. 454 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1915)
Walter v. Huggins
148 S.W. 148 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1912)
Armstrong v. State Ex Rel. Fain
1911 OK 225 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1911)
State ex inf. Major v. Woods
135 S.W. 932 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1911)
State ex rel. Scott v. Lichte
126 S.W. 466 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1910)
State ex rel. White v. Small
109 S.W. 1079 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
State ex inf. Rosenberger v. Town of Bellflower
108 S.W. 117 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
State v. Fleming
59 S.W. 118 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1900)
Spink v. Mueller
77 Mo. App. 85 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1898)
Burnes ex rel. Cook v. City of Edgerton
45 S.W. 293 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1898)
State ex inf. Crow v. Fleming
44 S.W. 758 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1898)
State ex rel. Beasley v. Young
61 Mo. App. 494 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
61 Mo. 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-patterson-v-mcreynolds-mo-1875.