Mayor, Councilmen and Citizens of City of Liberty v. Dealers Transport Co., No. 47966

CourtMissouri Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtWESTHUES
Citation343 S.W.2d 40
PartiesMAYOR, COUNCILMEN, AND CITIZENS OF the CITY OF LIBERTY, A Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DEALERS TRANSPORT COMPANY, A Corporation, and the City of Kansas City, Missouri, A Municipal Corporation, Defendants-Appellants.
Docket NumberNo. 47966
Decision Date19 February 1961

Page 40

343 S.W.2d 40
MAYOR, COUNCILMEN, AND CITIZENS OF the CITY OF LIBERTY, A
Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
DEALERS TRANSPORT COMPANY, A Corporation, and the City of
Kansas City, Missouri, A Municipal Corporation,
Defendants-Appellants.
No. 47966.
Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc.
Feb. 19, 1961.

Page 41

Benj. M. Powers, Richard H. Koenigsdorf, City Counselors, John J. Cosgrove, Associate City Counselor, Robert A. Meyers, Asst. City Counselor, Kansas City, for defendants-appellants.

William E. Turnage, City Atty., Liberty, for plaintiff-respondent.

WESTHUES, Judge.

This case is here on transfer from the Kansas City Court of Appeals. The opinion of that court is reported in 328 S.W.2d 727.

In this opinion, plaintiffs Mayor, Councilmen, and Citizens of the City of Liberty will be referred to as City of Liberty.

On September 15, 1958, the City of Liberty, located in Clay County, Missouri, filed a petition in the Circuit Court of that county for a declaratory judgment. The petition was filed under the Sawyer Act, Sec. 71.015, V.A.M.S., RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S., which authorizes the filing of such a petition under the Declaratory Judgment Act, Chapter 527, V.A.M.S., RSMo 1959. 1 The relief sought was to have the court declare that a proposed annexation of land to the City of Liberty was reasonable and necessary. Named as defendants were Dealers Transport Company and the City of Kansas City, Missouri. The Transport Company owned the property proposed to be annexed. Defendant Kansas City was made a defendant because that City had theretofore, on April 6, 1956, introduced an ordinance to amend its charter by annexing certain territory in Clay County, Missouri, effective January 1, 1961, which included the territory proposed to be taken by plaintiff City of Liberty. The Dealers Transport Company did not file an answer. Kansas City did file an answer, the substance of which we shall state later in this opinion.

The City of Liberty filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings as to Kansas City. This motion was sustained. Evidence was introduced bearing only on the issue of whether the extension of the territory was reasonable. Defendant Kansas City took no part in this hearing. The trial court decreed that the proposed annexation was reasonable and the court entered a judgment on the pleadings against Kansas City. Kansas City appealed to the Kansas City Court of Appeals. That court affirmed the action of the trial court. However, as may be noticed, the Court of Appeals did not rule the question of whether the judgment on the pleadings had the effect of preventing Kansas City from completing its proposed annexation. In fact, the Court of Appeals ruled that both cities should be permitted (if they so desired) to complete the annexation; that then, and only then, should the question of whether Kansas City had priority be decided. See 328 S.W.2d loc. cit. 732, where the court said, 'Nor do we decide what the respective rights of Liberty and Kansas City over the area in question might be in the speculative event that both complete their annexation proceedings.' On

Page 42

motion, the case was transferred to this court.

The case was argued and submitted to Division I of this court on May 4, 1960. In an opinion adopted on July 11, 1960, the cause was remanded to the trial court for the purpose of hearing evidence to determine whether the City of Kansas City had abandoned its annexation proceedings or had unduly delayed the completion of its proceedings and thereby lost its right of priority. On motion of the City of Liberty, the case was transferred to the Court en Banc where it was submitted on supplemental briefs and oral argument on January 25, 1961.

For a detailed statement of the case, we recommend a reading of the opinion of the Court of Appeals, 328 S.W.2d 727.

It will be noted that the Court of Appeals stated, in its opinion, 328 S.W.2d loc. cit. 730(1, 2), with reference to the claim of priority made by Kansas City, that 'Counsel for both Kansas City and Liberty agree that there exists in this state, and elsewhere, what is popularly referred to as 'the prior jurisdiction doctrine.' This doctrine has resulted from the sound recognition that there cannot be two municipal corporations with co-extensive powers of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 practice notes
  • Murphy v. Kansas City, Missouri, No. 18578-4.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Western District of Missouri
    • July 28, 1972
    ...Creek Drive, Mo.App., 434 S.W.2d 25 (Spfld.Ct.App.1968); Mayor, Councilmen, & Citizens of City of Liberty v. Dealer's Transport Co., 343 S.W.2d 40 (Mo.En Banc 1961); State ex inf. Taylor ex rel. Kansas City v. North Kansas City, 360 Mo. 374, 228 S.W.2d 762 (1950). Thus, in the instant case ......
  • Coeur D'Alene Turf Club, Inc. v. Cogswell, No. 10451
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • July 22, 1969
    ...the declaratory judgment effective. Sweeney v. American National Bank, supra; accord Mayor, Councilmen, Etc. v. Dealers Transport Co., 343 S.W.2d 40 (Missouri, 1961). And I.C. § 13-207 is not, excepting for its title in the Idaho Code, limited by its terms to the classical 'judgment in We m......
  • Emerson Elec. Mfg. Co. v. City of Ferguson, No. 48630
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • July 30, 1962
    ...proceedings filed in this court. The recent case of Mayor, Councilmen & Citizens of City of Liberty v. Dealers Transport Co., Mo., 343 S.W.2d 40, came here on transfer from a Court of Appeals, as did the older case of State ex inf. Mallett ex rel. Wommack v. City of Joplin, 332 Mo. 1193, 62......
  • Ewing v. City of Springfield, No. 8804
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • January 2, 1970
    ...developed after the suit was filed, but declaratory relief should be complete, Mayor, Councilmen, etc. v. Dealers Transport Co., Mo., 343 S.W.2d 40, 43(3), and for that reason we believe the rights of the parties should have been determined in this case as of the time they were It is argued......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 cases
  • Murphy v. Kansas City, Missouri, No. 18578-4.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Western District of Missouri
    • July 28, 1972
    ...Creek Drive, Mo.App., 434 S.W.2d 25 (Spfld.Ct.App.1968); Mayor, Councilmen, & Citizens of City of Liberty v. Dealer's Transport Co., 343 S.W.2d 40 (Mo.En Banc 1961); State ex inf. Taylor ex rel. Kansas City v. North Kansas City, 360 Mo. 374, 228 S.W.2d 762 (1950). Thus, in the instant case ......
  • Coeur D'Alene Turf Club, Inc. v. Cogswell, No. 10451
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • July 22, 1969
    ...the declaratory judgment effective. Sweeney v. American National Bank, supra; accord Mayor, Councilmen, Etc. v. Dealers Transport Co., 343 S.W.2d 40 (Missouri, 1961). And I.C. § 13-207 is not, excepting for its title in the Idaho Code, limited by its terms to the classical 'judgment in We m......
  • Emerson Elec. Mfg. Co. v. City of Ferguson, No. 48630
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • July 30, 1962
    ...proceedings filed in this court. The recent case of Mayor, Councilmen & Citizens of City of Liberty v. Dealers Transport Co., Mo., 343 S.W.2d 40, came here on transfer from a Court of Appeals, as did the older case of State ex inf. Mallett ex rel. Wommack v. City of Joplin, 332 Mo. 1193, 62......
  • Ewing v. City of Springfield, No. 8804
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • January 2, 1970
    ...developed after the suit was filed, but declaratory relief should be complete, Mayor, Councilmen, etc. v. Dealers Transport Co., Mo., 343 S.W.2d 40, 43(3), and for that reason we believe the rights of the parties should have been determined in this case as of the time they were It is argued......
  • 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