Legal Opinion · Dissent

Tierney v. Planned Industrial Expansion Authority of Kansas City

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided December 15, 1987No. 69317, 69528Published

1DissentWelliver, Judge

I respectfully dissent.

Our jurisdiction to transfer cases from the court of appeals is set forth in Mo. Const, art. V, § 10.

Cases pending in the court of appeals shall be transferred to the supreme court ... because of the general interest or importance of a question involved in the case, or for the purpose of reexamining the law, or pursuant to supreme court rule.

Rule 83.03 provides:

In any case in which a motion for rehearing has been overruled and an application for transfer under Rule 83.02 has been denied, the case may be transferred by order of this court on application of a party for…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State Ex Inf. Dalton v. Land Clearance for Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Missouri · 1954
  2. Parking Systems, Inc. v. Kansas City Downtown Redevelopment Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1974
  3. Annbar Associates v. West Side Redevelopment Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1965
  4. State Ex Rel. Atkinson v. Planned Industrial Expansion AuthoritySupreme Court of Missouri · 1975
  5. State Ex Rel. Weatherby Advertising Co. v. ConleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1975

5 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