Turner v. Stewart
Cases that cite this one
16 later published cases cite this decision.
- Carpenter v. City of St. Joseph (Mo. 1915)
- Kugler v. Ryan (Mo. Ct. App. 1984)
- Landrum v. McMinds (Mo. Ct. App. 1920)
- Hobart-Lee Tie Co. v. Stone (Mo. Ct. App. 1909)
- State ex rel. Jump v. Louisiana, Bowling Green & Ashley Gravel Road Co. (Mo. Ct. App. 1906)
- Mills v. Murray (Mo. Ct. App. 1971)
- State Ex Rel. Taylor v. Anderson (Mo. 1951)
- The Nat. Refining Co. v. Cox (Mo. Ct. App. 1933)
- Chapman v. Dean (Or. 1911)
- Strother v. American Cooperage Co. (Mo. Ct. App. 1906)
- Palmer v. Crisle (Mo. Ct. App. 1902)
- Graham v. Womack (Mo. Ct. App. 1900)
- Gordon v. Mansfield (Mo. Ct. App. 1900)
- Taylor v. Todd (Mo. Ct. App. 1892)
- Lakenan v. Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad Co. (Mo. Ct. App. 1889)
- Melcher v. Exchange Bank (Mo. 1884)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
This was a petition for an injunction, tlie substance of which, we recite. The plaintiff states that he is the owner and in possession of a private wharf and landing on the west side of the Osage River; that he is engaged in operating a saw-mill and machine for loading and unloading cars with railroad ties, "which mill and machine he has erected on said premises at great expense; that he is under contract to furnish and deliver a large amount of lumber to different parties, and that he has a large number of hands in his employment conducting his said business; that the defendants are the owners and proprietors of a steamer called the “Aggiethat without the consent of plaintiff and against his notice forbidding it, said defendants
To this petition the defendants filed a demurrer for want of facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. It-is urged that an injunction will not be granted to restrain, trespasses unless the parties are insolvent or the injury irreparable. It is also insisted that the jurisdiction of the matter complained of belongs to the courts of admiralty and not to the State courts. The court sustained the demurrer and thereupon entered final judgment dismissing the petition, from which action of the court the plaintiff presents his writ of error. -
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.