Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Belt v. City of St. Louis

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 26, 1901PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Mandamus. (1) The ordinance in controversy is invalid because it requires the board of public improvements to make a contract with relator which involves public work. Sec. 27, art. 6, charter of St. Louis; State ex rel. v. Barlow, 48 Mo. 16; Cole v. Shrainka, 37 Mo. App. 427, 433. (2) Said ordinance is invalid because it undertakes to grant to relator the right to use the streets for a private purpose.

Read the full summary

Mandamus. (1) The ordinance in controversy is invalid because it requires the board of public improvements to make a contract with relator which involves public work. Sec. 27, art. 6, charter of St. Louis; State ex rel. v. Barlow, 48 Mo. 16; Cole v. Shrainka, 37 Mo. App. 427, 433. (2) Said ordinance is invalid because it undertakes to grant to relator the right to use the streets for a private purpose. Matthews v. Alexander, 68 Mo. 115; Glasgow v. St. Louis, 87 Mo. 678; Cummings v. St. Louis, 90 Mo. 259; Glaessner v. Brewing Association, 100 Mo. 508; Seopp v. St. Louis, 137 Mo. 537; Coal…

1Opinion of the CourtGantt, J.

This is an original proceeding of mandamus instituted in this court to compel the board of public improvements of the city of St. Louis to enter into a contract with relator for the erection and maintenance, for ten years, of boxes to be placed in the streets of said city, to be used by relator for advertising purposes, and by the city of St. Louis for the purpose of holding any waste paper that might be thrown on said streets. On the return of the writ respondents, city of St. Louis and Emory S. Poster, filed returns, alleging, among other matters, that they were not proper parties to the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Verdin v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
  2. Julia Building Ass'n v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1885
  3. Gale v. Village of KalamazooMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
  4. City of Oakland v. CarpentierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
  5. Schopp v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Greene v. City of San AntonioCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
  2. Le Blanc v. City of New OrleansSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1915
  3. O'Fallon Development Co. v. City of O'FallonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1976
  4. Winkenwerder v. City of YakimaWashington Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Fifth Ave. Coach Co. v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1909

15 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