Cavanaugh v. Gerk, No. 26936.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtWhite
Citation280 S.W. 51
Docket NumberNo. 26936.
Decision Date15 March 1926
PartiesCAVANAUGH v. GERK, Chief of Police.
280 S.W. 51
CAVANAUGH
v.
GERK, Chief of Police.
No. 26936.
Supreme Court of Missouri, in Banc.
March 15, 1926.

Habeas corpus proceeding by Edward M. Cavanaugh against Joseph A. Gerk, Chief of Police of the City of St. Louis, to obtain petitioner's release from custody. Petitioner discharged.

Gustave Vahlkamp, of St. Louis, for petitioner.

Julius T. Muench and Charles J. Dolan, both of St. Louis (Arthur H. Bader, of St. Louis, of counsel), for respondent.

WHITE, J.


Habeas corpus. The petitioner alleges that he is unlawfully restrained of his liberty by the respondent in the city of St. Louis. By agreement of the parties, service of the writ and the production of the body of the petitioner were waived. The respondent filed his return setting up the reasons for holding the petitioner in custody.

There is no disagreement as to the facts in the case. The petitioner was arrested for driving his automobile in the city of St. Louis in disregard of an automatic stop signal at Fourteenth and Locust streets, and for going in the wrong direction on St. Charles street, a one-way street.

Ordinance No. 32846, creating the traffic council of the city of St. Louis, has the following provisions:

"Section 1. The president of the board of police commissioners, the director of streets and sewers, and the chairman of the legislative committee of the board of aldermen shall constitute a traffic council whose function it shall be to codify existing traffic ordinances, to harmonize the traffic ordinances of the city with the state law, to propose changes in the ordinances regulating traffic as the needs of the city may require, and to advise the board of aldermen regarding proposed changes."

Section 2 provides for the organization and places of meeting of the traffic council. Section 3 is as follows:

"Section 3. The recommendations of the traffic council shall be embodied in the forte of bills, and shall be introduced in the board of aldermen by the chairman of the legislative committee, to be considered in the same manner as any other bills. No recommendation of the traffic council shall have any binding force until it shall have been passed in the regular way by the board of aldermen and approved by the mayor."

Ordinance No. 23926 contains section 6. defining the powers of the traffic council, which in part is as follows:

"Section 6. Powers of Traffic Council.—(a) Powers in General.—The traffic council, as created by ordinance number thirty-two thousand eight hundred forty-six, approved February twenty-eighth, nineteen hundred twenty-four, shall have power by rules and regulations adopted by it to:

"(1) Designate the streets or parts of streets upon which there shall be no parking of vehicles or upon which there shall be parking for a limited time.

"(2) Exclude or restrict parking on designated streets during certain hours.

"(3) Permit angle parking in designated places.

"(4) Establish one-way streets.

"(5) Cause limit lines to be marked upon pavements and sidewalks for the direction of pedestrians and others.

"(6) Prohibit left-hand turns by vehicles at street corners.

"(7) Establish and cause to be erected traffic signals and signs and parking and no-parking signs at such places as may be designated by it, and such signals and signs so established shall be recognized and the directions followed by all operators of vehicles."

Other regulations similar in character follow:

"(b) The rules and regulations established by the traffic council, as hereinbefore provided, shall be published in the city journal, and upon their publication therein they shall become effective and shall govern the regulation of traffic for a period of ninety days after the date of publication, within which time there shall be introduced in the board of aldermen a bill embodying such rules and regulations, and such rules and regulations shall continue in full force and effect during such time as such bill shall be pending in the board of aldermen: Provided, however, that if no bill embodying such rules and regulations shall have been introduced in

280 S.W. 52

the board of aldermen within the period of ninety days after the publication of such rules and regulations, as hereinbefore provided, or if any such bill shall fail of final passage in the board of aldermen, then such rules and regulations shall cease to be in force and effect."

The traffic council caused to be erected at the intersection of Fourteenth and Locust streets automatic traffic signals,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 practice notes
  • City of Clayton v. Nemours, No. 26134.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • October 6, 1942
    ...to regulate parking, may define and establish zones where parking shall be either limited or prohibited (Cavanaugh v. Gerk, 313 Mo. 375; 280 S.W. 51); and so long as the ordinance is reasonable and necessary for the pubilc safety, the courts will have no recourse but to enforce it, if no ot......
  • Wilhoit v. City of Springfield, No. 6370.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • May 3, 1943
    ...enforce it, if no other obstacle to its validity exists." [City of Clayton v. Nemours, 164 S.W. (2d) 935; Cavanaugh v. Gerk, 313 Mo. 375, 280 S.W. 51.] When a city is given the power to do a certain thing it is necessarily left with large discretion as to the method to be adopted and the ma......
  • State ex rel. Field v. Smith, No. 31347.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 15, 1932
    ...of Commrs. v. Peters, 253 Mo. 533; Merchants Exchange v. Knott, 212 Mo. 616; State ex rel. v. Ashbrook, 154 Mo. 389; Cavanaugh v. Gerk, 280 S.W. 51; St. Louis v. Polar Wave Ice & Fuel Co., 296 S.W. 993; 1 Cooley on Taxation (4 Ed.) 185; Inhabitants of Twp. of Bernard v. Allen, 39 Atl. 716; ......
  • Auslander v. St. Louis, No. 29992.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • February 8, 1933
    ...would involve the modifications of well-established principles of law.' "This court held in Ex parte Cavanaugh, 313 Mo. 375, 380, 280 S.W. 51, that the establishment of `automatic signals and one-way streets' is among the things which the city of St. Louis may provide as a police regulation......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
30 cases
  • City of Clayton v. Nemours, No. 26134.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • October 6, 1942
    ...to regulate parking, may define and establish zones where parking shall be either limited or prohibited (Cavanaugh v. Gerk, 313 Mo. 375; 280 S.W. 51); and so long as the ordinance is reasonable and necessary for the pubilc safety, the courts will have no recourse but to enforce it, if no ot......
  • Wilhoit v. City of Springfield, No. 6370.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • May 3, 1943
    ...enforce it, if no other obstacle to its validity exists." [City of Clayton v. Nemours, 164 S.W. (2d) 935; Cavanaugh v. Gerk, 313 Mo. 375, 280 S.W. 51.] When a city is given the power to do a certain thing it is necessarily left with large discretion as to the method to be adopted and the ma......
  • State ex rel. Field v. Smith, No. 31347.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 15, 1932
    ...of Commrs. v. Peters, 253 Mo. 533; Merchants Exchange v. Knott, 212 Mo. 616; State ex rel. v. Ashbrook, 154 Mo. 389; Cavanaugh v. Gerk, 280 S.W. 51; St. Louis v. Polar Wave Ice & Fuel Co., 296 S.W. 993; 1 Cooley on Taxation (4 Ed.) 185; Inhabitants of Twp. of Bernard v. Allen, 39 Atl. 716; ......
  • Auslander v. St. Louis, No. 29992.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • February 8, 1933
    ...would involve the modifications of well-established principles of law.' "This court held in Ex parte Cavanaugh, 313 Mo. 375, 380, 280 S.W. 51, that the establishment of `automatic signals and one-way streets' is among the things which the city of St. Louis may provide as a police regulation......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT