State ex rel. Hooker v. City of St. Charles
| Decision Date | 03 April 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 46388,46388 |
| Citation | 668 S.W.2d 641 |
| Parties | STATE of Mo. ex rel., Warren HOOKER, et al., Respondents, v. CITY OF ST. CHARLES, et al., Appellants. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Ronald C. Gladney, Clayton, for respondents.
George A. Weible, St. Charles, for appellants.
The City of St. Charles, et al. (St. Charles), appeals from a judgment in the Circuit Court of St. Charles County wherein the trial court issued a "peremptory writ of mandamus" directing St. Charles to comply with arbitration provisions contained in a Work Resolution/Memorandum of Understanding (agreement) between it and Local 1921 of the International Association of Fire Fighters, representing the fire fighters of St. Charles' fire department.
On appeal, St. Charles contends the trial court erred in: (1) issuing a "peremptory writ of mandamus"; (2) refusing to consider St. Charles' counterclaim; (3) making certain conclusions of law; and (4) ordering the city council, a legislative body, to arbitrate. We dismiss the appeal in that the cause is moot.
On August 6, 1981, St. Charles and the union local entered into a Work Resolution/Memorandum of Understanding (agreement) to be effective from July 1, 1981 through June 30, 1982. Article 24 of the agreement pertains to the grievance procedure which is the basis of this action.
During the period covered by the agreement, grievances arose concerning health insurance and pay increases. The grievance procedure was followed by both parties until the Arbitration Board was to be selected as provided in the agreement. St. Charles refused to comply with the provisions concerning the selection of a chairman of the Arbitration Board.
The union filed a petition on February 19, 1982 seeking "a peremptory writ of mandamus commanding the City of St. Charles ... to perform all acts necessary to comprise an arbitration board pursuant to Article 24." St. Charles counterclaimed in three counts, the first of which is pertinent to this appeal. Count I of the counterclaim is labeled "Declaratory Judgment", alleges that the collective bargaining agreement "is not an enforceable contract binding upon Defendant City of St. Charles" and seeks a declaration by the court to that effect. After trial on an agreed statement of facts, the trial court issued a peremptory writ of mandamus on June 27, 1982 commanding St. Charles to process the grievances to arbitration pursuant to Article 24, to perform all necessary acts to select an arbitration board, to submit disputes to arbitration and to abide by any decision of the Arbitration Board.
In conjunction with the writ, the trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law. The conclusions of law are as follows:
1. Jurisdiction is appropriate with this court.
2. The existing Memorandum of Understanding/Work Resolution is binding upon the City, and under Article 24 of said Memorandum of Understanding/Work Resolution the City is bound to arbitrate disputes properly brought through the grievance procedure and not earlier resolved.
3. The clear intention of the parties and the practice of the parties under similar contract language is that the arbitration clause is valid and enforceable (citations omitted).
4. The City is in breach of its contractual obligation to arbitrate and mandamus lies to compel the performance of an official duty under this binding contract to arbitrate; it being found that a clear and unequivocal right to arbitration exists to which the City is not adhering and there being no adequate legal remedy. (citations omitted).
Before continuing, we note that St. Charles' brief did not contain a jurisdictional statement as required by Sup...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Chastain v. City of Kansas City
...should be dismissed. State ex rel. Donnell v. Searcy, 347 Mo. 1052, 152 S.W.2d 8, 10 (banc 1941); State ex rel. Hooker v. City of St. Charles, 668 S.W.2d 641, 643 (Mo.App.1984). We do not decide questions of law disconnected from the granting of actual relief. Committee for Educ. Equality v......
-
Cummings Enterprises, Inc. v. Shukert
...hold that where compliance with a peremptory writ of mandamus is voluntary there is no right to appeal. State ex rel. Hooker v. City of St. Charles, 668 S.W.2d 641 (Mo.App.1984); City of Carmel-By-The-Sea v. Monterey Cty., 137 Cal.App.3d 964, 187 Cal.Rptr. 379 (1982); Industrial Lease-Back ......
-
Bellon Wrecking & Salvage Co. v. David Orf, Inc.
...should be dismissed. State ex rel. Donnell v. Searcy, 347 Mo. 1052, 152 S.W.2d 8, 10 (banc 1941); State ex rel. Hooker v. City of St. Charles, 668 S.W.2d 641, 643 (Mo.App. E.D.1984). In the instant case, a judgment upon the arbitrator's award was entered in County I on January 6, 1998, and ......
-
State ex rel. Kirkpatrick v. Board of Election Com'rs of St. Louis County, WD36153
...particular election. State ex rel. Donnell v. Searcy, 347 Mo. 1052, 1059, 152 S.W.2d 8, 10 (banc 1941); State ex rel. Hooker v. City of St. Charles, 668 S.W.2d 641, 643 (Mo.App.1984); State ex rel. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Service Comm'n of Missouri, 645 S.W.2d 44, 51 The d......