Legal Opinion

Miller v. City of Manchester

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided August 11, 1992No. 61316PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEPHAN, Judge.

Daniel Miller (“Miller”) and Arlan Held (“Held”), fur trappers, filed a petition for declaratory judgment against the City of Manchester, Missouri (“the City”), challenging the validity of an ordinance which reads:... It shall be unlawful for any person to employ a steel trap or similar device, the purpose of which is to harm, mutilate or kill an animal, with the exception of mouse traps, rat traps, mole traps, or gopher traps.

Manchester, Mo., Ordinance 89-404 (May 15, 1989). The trial court upheld the ordinance. It further determined that neither Miller nor Held had standing…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Page Western, Inc. v. Community Fire Protection DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
  3. Morrow v. City of Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1990
  4. Sheldon v. Board of Trustees of the Police Retirement SystemSupreme Court of Missouri · 1989
  5. City of Bridgeton v. Ford Motor Credit Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1990

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Teefey v. Board of Zoning Adjustment of Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 2000
  2. Edwards v. City of EllisvilleMissouri Court of Appeals · 2013
  3. Unverferth v. City of FlorissantMissouri Court of Appeals · 2013
  4. Brunner v. City of ArnoldMissouri Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Metropolitan Express Services, Inc. v. City Of Kansas City, MissouriCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API