City of St. Charles v. Inter-Insurance Exchange, Etc., 24133.

CourtCourt of Appeal of Missouri (US)
Citation108 S.W.2d 626
Docket NumberNo. 24133.,24133.
Decision Date14 September 1937

Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Charles County; Edgar B. Woolfolk, Judge.

"Not to be published in State Reports."

The Inter-Insurance Exchange for the Automobile Club of Missouri was convicted of failing to pay a license tax imposed under ordinance of the City of St. Charles, and it appeals.


Gustav Vahlkamp and Ralph V. Wilson, both of St. Louis, Mo., for appellant.

Claude S. Tuttle, of St. Charles, for respondent.

BENNICK, Commissioner.

This case, which comes to the writer on reassignment, is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of conviction which was entered against it in the circuit court of St. Charles county upon its appeal to that court from a prior conviction in the police court of the City of St. Charles.

Acting pursuant to the power which has been generally conferred upon cities of the third class to levy and collect a license tax from numerous businesses and pursuits, including insurance companies and insurance agents (section 6840, R.S.Mo.1929 [Mo.St. Ann. § 6840, p. 5639]), plaintiff, City of St. Charles, a city of the third class, has heretofore enacted an ordinance (section 368, chap. 22, Revised Ordinances of the City of St. Charles of 1927) requiring every insurance company doing or soliciting business within the city by agent or otherwise to pay a license tax of $15 a year, and providing that no person as agent or otherwise shall solicit or receive any application for insurance, or deliver any policy, or collect any premium for or on behalf of any insurance company which has not complied with such ordinance with respect to the payment of the license tax prescribed.

Defendant, the Inter-Insurance Exchange for the Automobile Club of Missouri, is duly licensed by the State of Missouri as the title or office at and through which its subscribers may exchange contracts of insurance through their attorney in fact, Club Exchange Corporation, a Missouri corporation, in accordance with the provisions of chapter 37, article 11, R.S.Mo. 1929, § 5966 et seq. (Mo.St.Ann. § 5966 et seq., p. 4547 et seq.). It maintains its principal office at 4228 Lindell Boulevard in the City of St. Louis, and is represented in the City of St. Charles by one Dow E. Ruth, who solicits and receives applications for insurance.

Plaintiff charged in its complaint that defendant, on August 24, 1934, acting through its local agent, Ruth, did and solicited business in the city without having paid the license tax prescribed by the ordinance heretofore referred to. Defendant's failure to have paid the license tax was admitted, and upon a trial in the police court a fine of $10 was assessed against it as a penalty for its violation of the ordinance. Upon its appeal to the circuit court the judgment of the police court was upheld, and its further appeal to this court has followed in the usual course.

The question before us upon which the validity of defendant's conviction depends is that of whether the ordinance enacted by plaintiff city is valid with respect to an insurance company or exchange such as defendant, which operates through an attorney in fact upon the reciprocal or inter-insurance plan.

We have already pointed out that the power to impose a license tax upon insurance companies generally is expressly conferred upon cities of the third class by section 6840, supra. Defendant recognizes that this is true, but contends that by virtue of the provisions of section 5976, R.S.Mo. 1929 (Mo.St.Ann. § 5976, p. 4551), it is exempted from the application of an ordinance enacted pursuant to the general power so conferred. In other words, its point is that a municipality can exercise only such powers as...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • State ex rel. Consumers Public Service Co. v. Public Service Com'n, 38680
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 3, 1944
    ...rel. v. Brown, 105 S.W.2d 909, 340 Mo. 1198; State ex rel. v. Taylor, 18 S.W.2d 474, 323 Mo. 15; St. Charles v. Inter Insurance Exchange, 108 S.W.2d 626. (7) The Rural Electric Cooperative Act (Laws 1939, p. 298, Chap. 7, Art. 33, R.S. 1939) violates Section 28, Article IV, of the Constitut......
  • City of Poplar Bluff v. Poplar Bluff Loan & Bldg. Ass'n, 8185
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • July 17, 1963
    ...words or by necessary implication. 12 In City of St. Charles v. Inter-Insurance Exchange for Automobile Club of Missouri, supra, Mo.App., 108 S.W.2d 626, Section 5976 (1929) provided for payment of certain fees to the state supervisor 'which shall be in lieu of all license fees and taxes of......
  • Kumpf v. City of Wilmington
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Delaware
    • January 23, 1978
    ...v. City of Los Angeles, Cal.Supr., 40 Cal.2d 751, 256 P.2d 309 (1953), City of St. Charles v. Inter. Insurance Exchange, etc., Mo.App., 108 S.W.2d 626 (1937), Kansas City v. Oppenheimer, Mo.App., 100 Mo.App. 527, 75 S.W. 174 (1903), and City of Morgantown v. Fidelity Mutual Life Insurance C......
  • Gnekow v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 23643.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • September 14, 1937 contended by respondent; but there is no competent evidence in this record to show that he ever actually carried out such intention 108 S.W.2d 626 with respect to the policy involved The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded, with directions to the trial court to enter judgment awa......
  • 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