State on Inf. of Wallach v. Loesch

• Decision Date: 25 March 1943
• Docket Number: 38294
• Parties: State of Missouri on the information of Stanley Wallach, Prosecuting Attorney of St. Louis County, Missouri, Appellant, v. Conrad L. Loesch et al., Respondents
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

169 S.W.2d 675

350 Mo. 989

State of Missouri on the information of Stanley Wallach, Prosecuting Attorney of St. Louis County, Missouri, Appellant, v. Conrad L. Loesch et al., Respondents

No. 38294

Supreme Court of Missouri

March 25, 1943

Appeal from Circuit Court of St. Louis County; Hon. Julius R Nolte, Judge.

Affirmed.

Roy McKittrick, Attorney General, and Harry H. Kay Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.

(1) The Prosecuting Attorney of St. Louis County had the right to institute this proceeding in quo warranto. Secs. 12942 12944, 12991, R. S. 1939; Sec. 12993a, Laws 1941, p. 318; State ex rel. Brown v. McMillan, 108 Mo. 153; State ex inf. Dearing v. Berkeley, 140 Mo. 184; State ex rel. Kimbrell v. People's Ice, Storage & Fuel Co., 151 S.W. 101, 246 Mo. 168; State ex rel. Thrash v. Lamb, 141 S.W. 665, 237 Mo. 437; State ex inf. Norman v. Ellis, and State ex inf. Norman v. Hall, 325 Mo. 154, 28 S.W.2d 363. (2) The members of the County Planning Commission are public officers, and hence are amenable to a quo warranto proceeding. State ex inf. McKittrick v. Bode, 342 Mo. 162, 113 S.W.2d 805; State ex rel. Pickett v. Truman, 333 Mo. 1018, 64 S.W.2d 105; Laws, pp. 465-489; State ex rel. Cannon v. May, 106 Mo. 488; State ex rel. Cameron v. Shannon, 133 Mo. 139; Gracey v. St. Louis, 111 S.W. 1159, 213 Mo. 384; State ex rel. Flowers v. Morehead, 165 S.W. 746, 256 Mo. 683. (3) The Planning and Zoning Act of 1941 violates Section 14 of Article IX of the Constitution of Missouri in that it provides for the appointment of county officers for public convenience and provides for said officers a term of office exceeding four years. Sec. 15349, Laws 1941, p. 467; State ex rel. Buchanan County v. Imel, 146 S.W. 783, 242 Mo. 293; Hasting v. Jasper County, 282 S.W. 700, 314 Mo. 144; Sec. 14, Art. IX, Mo. Const.; State ex rel. Kane v. Johnson, 123 Mo. 43; People v. Perry, 79 Cal. 105; State ex rel. Rosenthal v. Smiley, 304 Mo. 549, 263 S.W. 825; State ex inf. Crain v. Moore, 339 Mo. 492, 99 S.W.2d 17. (4) The Planning and Zoning Act of 1941 violates Section 1 of Article IV of the Constitution of Missouri in that it delegates powers belonging to the General Assembly to the county court, the county planning commission and other boards and commissions. State ex rel. Rosenthal v. Smiley, 304 Mo. 549, 263 S.W. 825; Laws 1941, pp. 465-489; Sec. 1, Art. IV, Mo. Const.; State ex rel. Carpenter v. St. Louis, 318 Mo. 870, 2 S.W.2d 713; Ex parte Williams, 345 Mo. 1121, 139 S.W.2d 485; Cavanaugh v. Gerk, 313 Mo. 375, 280 S.W. 51; State ex rel. v. Kirby, 163 S.W.2d 990; 1 Cooley's Constitutional Limitations (8 Ed.), p. 228; State ex inf. Crain v. Moore, 339 Mo. 492, 99 S.W.2d 17; Merchants Exchange of St. Louis v. Knott, 111 S.W. 565, 212 Mo. 616. (5) The Planning and Zoning Act of 1941 violates Article III of the Constitution of Missouri in that it undertakes to authorize a branch of the judicial department of the State, to-wit, the county court, to exercise powers and functions of another branch of state government, to-wit, the General Assembly. Art. III, Mo. Const.; Sec. 36, Art. VI, Mo. Const. (6) The Planning and Zoning Act of 1941 violates Subsections 2, 5, 6 and 32 of Section 53 of Article IV of the Constitution of Missouri. Sec. 53, Art. IV, Mo. Const.; State ex rel. v. Calvird, 338 Mo. 601, 92 S.W.2d 186; State ex inf. v. Armstrong, 286 S.W. 705, 315 Mo. 298; City of Lebanon v. Schneider, 163 S.W.2d 588.

Erwin F. Vetter, County Counselor of St. Louis, for respondents.

(1) Section 14 of Article IX of the Constitution of Missouri: "Term of office of Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Adjustment more than four years." Cincinnati N. O. & P. Ry. Co. v. Cundiff, 166 Ky. 594, 179 S.W. 615; State ex rel. Bray v. Long, 21 Mont. 26, 52 P. 645; Commissioners of Sinking Fund v. George, 104 Ky. 260, 47 S.W. 779; Becker v. Boyle, 167 N.Y.S. 325; State ex rel. Windom v. Prince, Mayor, 131 Minn. 399, 155 N.W. 629; Wulf v. Kansas City, 77 Kan. 358, 94 P. 207; State ex rel. Wilson v. Bismarck Drainage Dist. No. 1, Douglas County, 102 Kan. 575, 171 P. 634; People v. Perry, 79 Cal. 105, 21 P. 423; State ex rel. v. Kirby, 136 S.W.2d 319. (2) The Act of 1941 does not delegate the legislative power of the General Assembly to the County Court, the County Planning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustment. State ex rel. Lashley v. Becker, 290 Mo. 560, 235 S.W. 1017; Ex parte Williams, 345 Mo. 1121, 139 S.W.2d 845; Little River Drain. Dist. v. Lassater, 325 Mo. 493, 29 S.W.2d 716; State v. Davis, 302 Mo. 307, 259 S.W. 80. (3) The Act of 1941 does not violate Article III of the Constitution of Missouri, in that it authorizes a branch of the judicial department of the State to exercise functions of another branch of the State government. Sec. 36, Art. VI, Mo. Const.; Sec. 1, Art. VI, Mo. Const.; State ex rel. v. Locker, 266 Mo. 384, 181 S.W. 1001; State ex rel. v. Harty, 276 Mo. 583, 208 S.W. 835; State ex rel. West v. Clark, 41 Mo. 44; Wood ex rel. v. Henry, 55 Mo. 560; Miller v. Iron County, 29 Mo. 122; Bash v. Truman, 335 Mo. 1077, 75 S.W.2d 840. (4) The Act of 1941 does not violate Subsections 2, 5, 6, 15, 17 and 26 of Section 53 of Article IV, Constitution of Missouri, "prohibiting local or special laws relating to subject matter contained therein." State ex rel. v. Calvird, 338 Mo. 601, 92 S.W.2d 184; Sec. 54, Art. IV, Mo. Const. (5) The Act of 1941 does not violate Section 53 of Article IV, Constitution of Missouri, in that the act is a local or special law where a general law can be made applicable. Elting v. Hickman, 172 Mo. 237, 72 S.W. 700; State v. Baskowitz, 250 Mo. 82, 156 S.W. 945; 59 C. J. 732, 733, 735; Van Cleve v. Passaic Valley Sewerage Commrs., 71 N. J. Law 183, 58 A. 571, 572; Davis v. Jasper County, 318 Mo. 248, 300 S.W. 493; City of Springfield v. Smith, 322 Mo. 1129, 19 S.W.2d 1; State ex inf. v. Hedrick, 294 Mo. 21, 74, 241 S.W. 402, 420; State ex rel. v. Hartmann, 229 Mo. 410, 424, 253 S.W. 991; State v. McCann, 329 Mo. 748, 47 S.W.2d 95; Advler v. Doegan, 251 N.Y. 467, 167 N.E. 705; Ex parte Loving, 178 Mo. 194; City of Lebanon v. Schneider, 163 S.W.2d 588. (6) Unconstitutionality of statute must appear beyond reasonable doubt. State v. Knight, 323 Mo. 1241, 21 S.W.2d 767; Edwards v. Lesueur, 132 Mo. 410, 33 S.W. 1130, 31 L. R. A. 815; State v. Cantwell, 179 Mo. 245, 78 S.W. 560; State ex rel. Kelley v. Kirby, 260 Mo. 120, 168 S.W. 746; State ex rel. Emmons v. Farmer, 271 Mo. 306, 196 S.W. 1106; State ex rel. Columbia Tel. Co. v. Adkinson, 271 Mo. 28, 195 S.W. 741; State ex rel. Webster Groves Sanitary Sewer Dist. v. Smith, 342 Mo. 365, 115 S.W.2d 816; Bassen v. Monckton, 308 Mo. 641, 274 S.W. 404; Hull v. Baumann, 345 Mo. 159, 131 S.W.2d 721. (7) Zoning and planning laws have been held constitutional. Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 47 S.Ct. 114, 121, 71 L.Ed. 303, 54 A. L. R. 1016; State ex rel. Oliver Cadillac Co. v. Christopher, 317 Mo. 1179, 298 S.W. 720; Glenco Lime & Cement Co. v. St. Louis, 108 S.W.2d 143.

Frank E. Shaw, Colonel, J. A. G. D., The Judge Advocate, Seventh Service Command, by Bert E. Church, Captain, J. A. G. D., Litigation Officer, Seventh Service Command, amicus curiae.

(1) Zoning and planning acts authorizing land-use regulations in the unincorporated areas have been adopted in many of the states. California. Planning Act, 1929, now Act 5211b, p. 284, Gen. Laws of California, Vol. II (1937). Colorado. Laws of Colorado, p. 294 (1939). Florida. 1 Gen. Laws of Florida (1937), p. 245. Georgia. Georgia Laws (1939), p. 406. Illinois. Laws of Illinois (1935) 689, Sec. 152i, Chap. 34, R. S. Ill. 1941. Indiana. Laws of Ind. (1935), chap. 239, p. 1239. Kansas. Laws of Kansas (1939), p. 280. Kentucky. Sec. 147.130, Chap. 147, R. S. Ken. 1942. Michigan. Sec. 2642, Chap. 54, Compiled Laws of Michigan (1929). Minnesota. Laws of Minnesota (1939), p. 513. Missouri. Planning and Zoning Act, Laws of Missouri (1941), p. 465. Pennsylvania. 2 Laws of Pennsylvania (1937), p. 2129. Virginia. Laws of Virginia (1938), p. 777. Washington. Chap. 44, Laws of Washington (1935). Wisconsin. Sec. 59.97, R. S. Wis. 1939. (2) The General Assembly may confer upon a county "Board of Commissioners" power to enact land-use regulations. Board of Commrs. of Vanderburgh County v. Sanders, 218 Ind. 43, 30 N.E.2d 713; Acker v. Baldwin, 18 Cal.2d 341, 115 P.2d 455; Enzor v. Askew, 191 Ga. 576, 13 S.E.2d 374.

Westhues, C. Bohling and Barrett, CC., concur.

OPINION

WESTHUES

This is a quo warranto proceeding to oust respondents Conrad L. Loesch, William Bruemmer, Norman Risch, William Dierberg, Sr., James H. O'Brien, Henry J. Babler and Edward J. Bayer, as members of the County Planning Commission of St. Louis county, Missouri. Appellant's brief contains a fair statement of the case which we have seen fit to adopt. It reads:

"The Sixty-first Session of the General Assembly of Missouri passed an act relating to county planning and zoning. The act authorized the county courts of counties affected by the act to provide for the preparation, adoption, amendment extension or carrying out of a county plan, and to create by order a county planning commission with powers and duties in said act set out. The act, which contained an emergency clause, was approved by the Governor on August 8, 1941, and hence went into effect on that date.

"On September 26, 1941, the County Court of St. Louis County which county came within the terms of said act, made and entered of record an order establishing and creating a county planning commission in accordance with the provisions of the Planning and Zoning Act passed by the General Assembly as aforesaid, and appointed respondents as members of said planning commission. Said commission organized by...