State v. Vasel

47 Mo. 444
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided March 15, 1871·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Currier, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a proceeding under the statute for extortion. The case is not distinguishable in principle from that of State v. [445] Vasel, ante, p. 416. There was testimony tending to prove the material allegations of the complaint, which well warranted the result reached by the court. No instructions were asked or given on either side.

The objections to the complaint sought to be raised by the motion in arrest, if of force at all, are not available under that motion, and the judgment will be affirmed.

The other judges concur.

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

State v. Vasel, 47 Mo. 444 (Mo. 1871).

47 Mo. 444 (State v. Vasel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cushing v. Powell
109 S.W. 1054 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
Huber Manufacturing Co. v. Hunter
87 Mo. App. 50 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1901)
Missouri Edison Electric Co. v. Lewis
86 Mo. App. 612 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1900)
Guinotte v. Ridge
46 Mo. App. 254 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1891)
Hudson v. Wabash Western Railway Co.
101 Mo. 13 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1890)
Hudson v. Wabash & Western Railway Co.
32 Mo. App. 667 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1888)
Hoffman v. Parry
23 Mo. App. 20 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1886)
Gillson v. Price
18 Nev. 109 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1883)
Williams v. Mellon
56 Mo. 262 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1874)