Citizens Against Rezoning, Inc. v. St. Louis County

Citizens Against Rezoning, Inc. v. St. Louis Cnty., 563 S.W.2d 172 (Mo. Ct. App. 1978)

Court: Missouri Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided: February 28, 1978
Docket: No. 39133
Judges: Dowd, Reinhard, Stewart
Citations: 563 S.W.2d 172

Cited by 6 1 descriptions by later courts

Opinion of the Court — Stewart

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

STEWART, Presiding Judge.

Plaintiff, a not-for-profit corporation filed a petition for declaratory judgment seeking to have an ordinance of St. Louis County declared invalid. The ordinance questioned was an amendment to the St. Louis County Zoning Ordinance, changing the classification of a substantial tract of land from a residential district to a planned commercial district. The defendants filed a joint motion for summary judgment which was sustained by the trial court. We affirm.

The threshold question of plaintiff’s standing to bring the action is dispositive of the cause. A detailed discussion of the contents of the petition is not necessary for our consideration of the case.

The allegations of the petition determinative of the issue read:

“1. That plaintiff is a Not for Profit Missouri Corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Missouri.

“2. That all of the members of the plaintiff corporation are residents of the State of Missouri, County of St. Louis.

“3. That all of the members of plaintiff corporation are residents and homeowners of the area adjoining Highway 270 and Olive Street Road, in the County of St. Louis, the area rezoned by the County Council by Ordinance No. 7984 and all have interests adverse to and substantially affected by the passage of said ordinance.”

Before a person may bring a declaratory action to attack the validity of a statute or ordinance he must have a legally protectable interest. § 527.020, Rule 87.-02(a). The not-for-profit corporation is a legal entity separate and apart from the persons who are members of the corporation. In order for the corporation to have standing to bring an action attacking the validity of the ordinance the corporation itself must have a legally protectable interest. The interests of the individual members of the corporation can not give standing to the corporation. Lindenwood Improvement Association v. Lawrence, 278 S.W.2d 30 (Mo.App.1955).

The petition does not allege facts from which it can be said that the plaintiff in this case has a legally protectable interest. Plaintiff has no standing to bring the action. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

DOWD and REINHARD, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

(stating that a “not-for-profit corporation is a legal entity separate and apart from the persons who are members of the corporation.”)

Malin v. Mo. Ass'n of Cmty. Task Forces, No. WD83322 (Mo. Ct. App. July 21, 2020)

Cited by 6 cases

View all citing references →

State Appellate Courts6

Relies on it most ⓘ

Citizens for Safe Waste Management v. St. Louis County810 S.W.2d 635 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991)
Citizens for Rural Preservation, Inc. v. Robinett648 S.W.2d 117 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983)
Missourians for Separation of Church & State v. Robertson592 S.W.2d 825 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979)
May Department Stores Co. v. County of St. Louis607 S.W.2d 857 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980)
State ex rel. Columbus Park Community Council v. Board of Zoning Adjustment of Kansas City864 S.W.2d 437 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993)
Aaron Malin v. Missouri Association of Community Task Forces, D/B/A ACT MissouriNo. WD83322 (Mo. Ct. App. July 21, 2020)

Most recent

Aaron Malin v. Missouri Association of Community Task Forces, D/B/A ACT MissouriNo. WD83322 (Mo. Ct. App. July 21, 2020)
State ex rel. Columbus Park Community Council v. Board of Zoning Adjustment of Kansas City864 S.W.2d 437 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993)
Citizens for Safe Waste Management v. St. Louis County810 S.W.2d 635 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991)
Citizens for Rural Preservation, Inc. v. Robinett648 S.W.2d 117 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983)
May Department Stores Co. v. County of St. Louis607 S.W.2d 857 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980)
Missourians for Separation of Church & State v. Robertson592 S.W.2d 825 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Lindenwood Improvement Ass'n v. Lawrence, 278 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. Ct. App. 1955)	7

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list