Mail-Well Commercial Printing, Inc. v. City of Crestwood

Missouri Court of Appeals

Mail-Well Commercial Printing, Inc. v. City of Crestwood

91 S.W.3d 143, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 2299, 2002 WL 31655166

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 26, 2002

DocketED 81089

StatusPublished

This text of 91 S.W.3d 143 (Mail-Well Commercial Printing, Inc. v. City of Crestwood) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mail-Well Commercial Printing, Inc. v. City of Crestwood, 91 S.W.3d 143, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 2299, 2002 WL 31655166 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mail-Well Commercial Printing, d/b/a Color-Art, (hereinafter, “Color-Art”) appeals from the circuit court’s judgment upholding the decision of the Board of Aldermen of the City of Crestwood (hereinafter, “the Board”) denying its revised application for site plan approval for improvements to its property. Color-Art claims the Board erred in denying its application because said denial had no factual basis, deprived Color-Art of its state and federal due process rights, and impermissi-bly delegated the Board’s authority to its private citizens.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcripts and find the Board’s decision was supported by competent and substantial evidence based upon the whole record. Rice v. Board of Adjustment of Village of Bel-Ridge, 804 S.W.2d 821, 822 (Mo.App. E.D.1991). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mail-Well Commercial Printing, d/b/a Color-Art, (hereinafter, “Color-Art”) appeals from the circuit court’s judgment upholding the decision of the Board of Aldermen of the City of Crestwood (hereinafter, “the Board”) denying its revised application for site plan approval for improvements to its property. Color-Art claims the Board erred in denying its application because said denial had no factual basis, deprived Color-Art of its state and federal due process rights, and impermissi-bly delegated the Board’s authority to its private citizens.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the transcripts and find the Board’s decision was supported by competent and substantial evidence based upon the whole record. Rice v. Board of Adjustment of Village of Bel-Ridge, 804 S.W.2d 821, 822 (Mo.App. E.D.1991). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 S.W.3d 143, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 2299, 2002 WL 31655166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mail-well-commercial-printing-inc-v-city-of-crestwood-moctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack