¶1 (dissenting). — In this case, I dissent
¶2 from the opinion by the learned Special Judge, for the reason expressed by Valliant, C. J., in the case of Johnson v. United Railways Co., 247 Mo. l. c. 366.
281 Mo. 90
219 S.W 38
Johnson v. United Railways Co.
Decided February 16, 1920
Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1920-02-16
Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. George H. Shields, Judge. (1) There is no suggestion in the petition of fraud ' by inference as a result of a practical common directory of the two companies, or tlieir want of contractual capacity as between themselves, and if there was, this would not be sufficient. The two companies would not lose their respective corporate individualities by such faet nor their capacity to contract with each other.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Appirmed · Decided 1920-02-16
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently December 1990
7 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →