State ex rel. Brentwood School Dist. v. State Tax Commission, No. 61253

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtSEILER; BARDGETT, C. J., DONNELLY, RENDLEN and WELLIVER, JJ., WELBORN, Special Judge, and FINCH; MORGAN; HIGGINS
Citation589 S.W.2d 613
Docket NumberNo. 61253
Decision Date14 November 1979
PartiesSTATE of Missouri ex rel. BRENTWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT et al., Relators-Appellants, v. STATE TAX COMMISSION of Missouri et al., Respondents, and Cheshire Motor Hotel, Inc., et al., Intervenors-Respondents.

Page 613

589 S.W.2d 613
STATE of Missouri ex rel. BRENTWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT et al.,
Relators-Appellants,
v.
STATE TAX COMMISSION of Missouri et al., Respondents,
and
Cheshire Motor Hotel, Inc., et al., Intervenors-Respondents.
No. 61253.
Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc.
Nov. 14, 1979.

George J. Bude, Ziercher, Hocker, Tzinberg, Human & Michenfelder, Clayton, for relators-appellants.

John Ashcroft, Atty. Gen., Richard L. Wieler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondents.

Jerome Wallach, Fenton, for intervenors-respondents.

SEILER, Judge.

Relator school districts contend they are entitled to intervene as parties respondent in tax assessment cases before the State Tax Commission and sought mandamus in the circuit court accordingly. Their petition was dismissed and they have appealed. Jurisdiction over this appeal is doubtful; appellants assert that the Court's jurisdiction is based upon the need in this case for a construction of the revenue laws, under Mo.Const. art. V, § 3. Respondents contend that the issue presented is a procedural question and that appellants' assertion of jurisdiction is misplaced, but nonetheless urge the Court to take jurisdiction because of the general interest and importance of the question, as well as the urgency interposed by a delay in tax assessment and distribution of revenue to the appellant school districts. This case was advanced on the Court's docket on motion and the tax appeal proceedings below were stayed pending the outcome of this appeal. We therefore will retain and decide the case rather than go through the time-consuming procedure of sending the case to the court of appeals and then transferring it back prior to opinion. Foremost-McKesson, Inc. v. Davis, 488 S.W.2d 193 (Mo. banc 1972).

Page 614

Various property owners instituted proceedings before the State Tax Commission to appeal tax assessments for 1977 and 1978 made by the assessor of St. Louis County. These appeals were filed on August 16, 1978 and August 24, 1978. On October 25, 1978, the Brentwood, Clayton, Mehlville R-9, and Ritenour School Districts ("school districts") filed motions to intervene in the tax appeals. On December 11, 1978, the State Tax Commission ruled that the school districts' motions to intervene were untimely, citing its rule 12 C.S.R. 30-2.050, which requires that motions to intervene be filed within thirty days of the institution of proceedings to review assessments. On December 19, 1978, appellant school districts filed a petition for alternate and absolute writ of mandamus and the circuit court issued the alternative writ of mandamus against the State Tax Commission. After respondents filed their return and motions to quash, relators filed their reply, and following oral arguments, the court quashed its alternative writ of mandamus on February 15, 1979, based upon a finding that the writ was improvidently issued and dismissed the petition.

The writ of mandamus "will not lie to establish a legal right, but its office is to enforce one which has already been established." State ex rel. Crites v. Short, 351 Mo. 1013, 174 S.W.2d 821, 823 (1943). Unless the school districts have an established legal right to intervene, the circuit...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 practice notes
  • Banks v. Slay, Case No. 4:13CV02158 ERW
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Missouri)
    • July 25, 2016
    ...a writ of mandamus may enforce a legal right which has already been established. State ex rel. Brentwood Sch. Dist. v. State Tax Comm'n , 589 S.W.2d 613, 614 (Mo.1979). Writs of mandamus are not to be utilized to create new rights, but only to establish or enforce a right which already exis......
  • Matanuska-Susitna Borough School Dist. v. State, MATANUSKA-SUSITNA
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alaska (US)
    • January 31, 1997
    ...since it, like the Borough, is not a "person" entitled to equal protection. See State ex rel. Brentwood School Dist. v. State Tax Comm'n, 589 S.W.2d 613, 615 (Mo.1979) (en banc) (school districts are not "persons" and may not charge the state with due process 3 Sec. 14.11.100. State aid for......
  • State ex inf. Riederer ex rel. Pershing Square Redevelopment Corp. v. Collins, No. WD
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • November 27, 1990
    ...the right. See, State ex rel. Patterson v. Tucker, 519 S.W.2d at 25; State ex rel. Brentwood School District v. State Tax Commission, 589 S.W.2d 613, 614 (Mo.banc 1979); State ex rel. Lovell v. Tinsley, 241 Mo.App. 690, 236 S.W.2d 24, 27 (1951). In its petition, Pershing claims its right to......
  • State ex rel. Chassaing v. Mummert, No. 76649
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 22, 1994
    ...a legal right, but only to compel performance of a right that already exists. State ex rel. Brentwood School Dist. v. State Tax Comm'n, 589 S.W.2d 613, 614 (Mo. banc 1979). As this Court has often stated, the purpose of the writ is to execute, not adjudicate. Schneider, 609 S.W.2d at In the......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
19 cases
  • Banks v. Slay, Case No. 4:13CV02158 ERW
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Missouri)
    • July 25, 2016
    ...a writ of mandamus may enforce a legal right which has already been established. State ex rel. Brentwood Sch. Dist. v. State Tax Comm'n , 589 S.W.2d 613, 614 (Mo.1979). Writs of mandamus are not to be utilized to create new rights, but only to establish or enforce a right which already exis......
  • Matanuska-Susitna Borough School Dist. v. State, MATANUSKA-SUSITNA
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alaska (US)
    • January 31, 1997
    ...since it, like the Borough, is not a "person" entitled to equal protection. See State ex rel. Brentwood School Dist. v. State Tax Comm'n, 589 S.W.2d 613, 615 (Mo.1979) (en banc) (school districts are not "persons" and may not charge the state with due process 3 Sec. 14.11.100. State aid for......
  • State ex inf. Riederer ex rel. Pershing Square Redevelopment Corp. v. Collins, No. WD
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • November 27, 1990
    ...the right. See, State ex rel. Patterson v. Tucker, 519 S.W.2d at 25; State ex rel. Brentwood School District v. State Tax Commission, 589 S.W.2d 613, 614 (Mo.banc 1979); State ex rel. Lovell v. Tinsley, 241 Mo.App. 690, 236 S.W.2d 24, 27 (1951). In its petition, Pershing claims its right to......
  • State ex rel. Chassaing v. Mummert, No. 76649
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 22, 1994
    ...a legal right, but only to compel performance of a right that already exists. State ex rel. Brentwood School Dist. v. State Tax Comm'n, 589 S.W.2d 613, 614 (Mo. banc 1979). As this Court has often stated, the purpose of the writ is to execute, not adjudicate. Schneider, 609 S.W.2d at In the......
  • 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