Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)

Citation: Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Parent Document: Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 1902-02-18
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8296427/leet-v-gratz/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (42)

Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)
Leet v. Gratz, 92 Mo. App. 422 (1902)

Full Text

638 chars

If the word “dues” could be construed to include an estate in lands, or if “discharges” were given for interests in realty, this argument might be persuasive; but obviously the clause admits of no such meaning and was designed to confer no such power. It relates to money demands which often prove uncollectible; whereas, the interest of a minor in real estate can be certainly recovered. The statutes in regard to the duties of guardians and curators receive a strict construction and are not allowed to embrace matters not clearly within their terms. Horine v. Horine, 11 Mo. 649; Beal v. Harmon, 38 Mo. 435; Woods v. Boots, 60 Mo. 546.