Klene v. Marjorie Realty Co.
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Eon. Jesse A. McDonald!, Judge. (1) The Act of 1903 is in conflict with the Constitution of Missouri, (a) Because it is an arbitrary, unusual, unnecessary and unreasonable interference with the right of private contract, and with the conduct of private business. Woolley v. Mears, 226 Mo. 41; Grossman v. Caminez, 79 N. Y. App. Div. 15; Fisher Co. v. Woods, 187 N. Y. 90; State v. Loomis, 115 Mo. 307; Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Eon. Jesse A. McDonald!, Judge. (1) The Act of 1903 is in conflict with the Constitution of Missouri, (a) Because it is an arbitrary, unusual, unnecessary and unreasonable interference with the right of private contract, and with the conduct of private business. Woolley v. Mears, 226 Mo. 41; Grossman v. Caminez, 79 N. Y. App. Div. 15; Fisher Co. v. Woods, 187 N. Y. 90; State v. Loomis, 115 Mo. 307; Mo. Constitution, art. 2, secs. 4 and 15. (b) Because the act is local and special when a general act could be made applicable. Mo. Constitution, art. 4,…
1Opinion of the CourtGraves, J.
This case involves an agent’s commission for the exchange of real estate. The amount involved is small, $291.70', but the case reaches this court upon a constitutional question. Defendant Vrooman was the president of defendant Marjorie Realty Company. Sometime before the transaction involved in this case, Vrooman had employed plaintiff to work in the office of defendant company, and agreed to pay him in cash the sum of eighteen dollars per week, and in ád'dition thereto one-half of the commissions on sales or exchanges made by the said Klene.
From the evidence in this record, it appears that…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Woolley v. MearsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
3Cited by1 opinion
- Printz v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1911