295 Mo.
Volume 295 — Missouri Reports
50 opinions
- 295 Mo. 1State v. Hembree and Jacobs (1922)
- 295 Mo. 14State Ex Rel. Melvin v. Hackmann (1922)
- 295 Mo. 28Condemnation of Land in West Park District Under Kansas City Ordinance No. 37008 v. Boruff (1922)
- 295 Mo. 49Ex Parte Sangster (1922)
- 295 Mo. 63State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Buder (1922)
- 295 Mo. 71City of St. Louis v. Kellman (1922)
- 295 Mo. 93Kaesser v. Becker (1922)
- 295 Mo. 118Lincoln University v. Hackmann (1922)
- 295 Mo. 128Ex Parte Jack v. Jack (1922)
- 295 Mo. 134Sexton v. Sexton (1922)
- 295 Mo. 144State Ex Rel. Hyde v. Jackson County Medical Society (1922)
- 295 Mo. 162Hornbuckle v. McCarty (1922)
- 295 Mo. 174Lehner v. Roth (1922)
- 295 Mo. 177Ingalsbe v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. (1922)
- 295 Mo. 188Searcy v. Noll Welty Lumber Co. (1922)
- 295 Mo. 195Anderson v. Sutton (1922)
- 295 Mo. 212Schee v. Boone (1922)
- 295 Mo. 230Sedgwick v. National Bank (1922)
- 295 Mo. 263Buerck v. Mid-Nation Iron Products Co. (1922)
- 295 Mo. 293City of St. Louis v. Hellscher (1922)
- 295 Mo. 298Laclede Land & Improvement Co. v. State Tax Commission (1922)
- 295 Mo. 307State Ex Rel. Missouri State Life Insurance v. Allen (1922)
- 295 Mo. 322Schmelzer v. Kansas City (1922)
- 295 Mo. 333Lientz v. Schotte (1922)
- 295 Mo. 344State Ex Inf. McAllister Ex Rel. Lincoln v. Bird (1922)
- 295 Mo. 353Unrein v. Oklahoma Hide Co. (1922)
- 295 Mo. 375State Ex Rel. Vogt v. Reynolds (1922)
- 295 Mo. 402Stocke v. Edwards (1922)
- 295 Mo. 417State Ex Rel. Ray County v. Hackmann (1922)
- 295 Mo. 435In Re Hagan (1922)
- 295 Mo. 453State Ex Rel. Bender v. Hackmann (1922)
- 295 Mo. 458State Ex Rel. Copeland v. Wurdeman (1922)Rule made absolute
Prohibition. (1) The committeemen elected are public officers. State ex rel. Ponath v. Hamilton, 240 S. W. 440. (2) Obedience of the orders as contained in said subpoenas would mean a violation of the provisions of Section 3, Article 8, of the Constitution.
- 295 Mo. 466Wright v. Board of Education (1922)
- 295 Mo. 494Brookings v. Scudder (1922)
- 295 Mo. 519Sommer v. Continental Portland Cement Co. (1922)
- 295 Mo. 538State Ex Rel. Gabbert v. Lucas (1922)
- 295 Mo. 554Baxter v. Weber (1922)
- 295 Mo. 566State Ex Rel. Stevens v. Wurdeman (1922)
- 295 Mo. 586Ex parte Lemond (1922)
- 295 Mo. 586Ex Parte Le Mond (1922)
- 295 Mo. 596Stephens v. Mound City Liverymen & Undertakers Ass'n (1922)
- 295 Mo. 607State Ex Rel. Preiss v. Seibel (1922)
- 295 Mo. 629In Re Poindexter v. Pettis County (1922)
- 295 Mo. 638State Ex Inf. Attorney-General v. Dallmeyer (1922)
- 295 Mo. 648State Ex Rel. Hazel v. Watkins (1922)
- 295 Mo. 653In Matter of M.T. January (1922)
- 295 Mo. 664Coe v. Greenley (1922)
- 295 Mo. 667State Ex Rel. Studebaker Corp. of America v. Trimble (1922)
- 295 Mo. 680Burns v. Prudential Insurance Co. (1922)
- 295 Mo. 695State v. Graham (1922)Transferred to Springfield Court of Appeals
<p>1. BILL OF EXCEPTIONS: Not Made Part of Eecord. Where the transcript of the record entries concludes with an order reciting the filing of a bill of exceptions, and that recital is followed by the authentication by the clerk in which he certifies “the foregoing to be a complete transcript of the files and orders of record in the above entitled cause,” a document attached to said transcript, purporting to be a bill of exceptions and approved by pie trial judge, cannot be considered on appeal. A bill of exceptions, when properly signed and filed, forms a part of the record, and it is not sufficient to simply attach it to the transcript of record entries, without certification, but to be considered as such it must be authenticated and identified as a part of the record.</p> <p>2. -: Appellate Jurisdiction. Where defendant was convicted of the misdemeanor of unlawfully having intoxicating liquor in his possession and no constitutional question arises upon the record proper,- and his purported bill of exceptions cannot be considered because not made a part of the record, the Supreme Court has no . jurisdiction of his appeal, and the cause must therefore be transferred to the proper court of appeals.</p>