State v. Searcy
This text of 20 S.W. 186 (State v. Searcy) 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.
Opinion
This case is here on the certificate of the St. Louis court of appeals. 46 Mo. App. 422. The local-option election involved in this case has been twice before the St. Louis court of appeals (State v. Searcy, 39 Mo. App. 393, and the case at bar, 46 Mo. App., supra), and every question now urged for a reversal of the judgment has been disposed of, and correctly disposed of, by that court. The opinions of the court of appeals are so exhaustive and conclusive that we deem it a work of supererogation to add anything to them. It follows that the opinions in State v. Mackin, 41 Mo. App. 99, and State v. Prather, 41 Mo. App. 451, so far as they conflict with the Searcy cases, supra, are disapproved and overruled.
We reaffirm the constitutionality of the local-option statute. State v. Dillard Moore, 107 Mo. 78.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
20 S.W. 186, 111 Mo. 236, 1892 Mo. LEXIS 143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-searcy-mo-1892.