Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 1
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 1.080 (2026)

County to include St. Louis

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  1.080.  County to include St. Louis — county clerk to include register of St. Louis. — Whenever the word "county" is used in any law, general in its character to the whole state, it includes the city of St. Louis, unless such construction is inconsistent with the evident intent of the law, or of some law specially applicable to such city.  Whenever the county clerk is authorized or required to perform an act by a law which applies to the city of St.  Louis as well as to the counties of the state, the register of the city of St. Louis is authorized or required to perform the act insofar as it is to be performed in the city.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 655, A. 1949 S.B. 1001, A.L. 1957 p. 587)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 655; 1919 § 7058; 1909 § 8057

CROSS REFERENCE:

County officers of St. Louis, duties required by law to include corresponding city officers, when, 105.260

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1957–1990 · leading case: State Ex Rel. McClellan v. Godfrey, 519 S.W.2d 4 (Mo. 1975).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Ex Rel. McClellan v. Godfrey, 519 S.W.2d 4 (Mo. 1975). · cites it 8× “Louis since it is only laws applicable to all counties in general, under Section 1.080, which are applicable to the City of St.”
Land Clearance for Redevelopment Auth. v. Zitko, 386 S.W.2d 69 (Mo. 1964). · cites it 6× “In counties having more than 75,000 inhabitants, an application for a change of venue to another county on the ground of undue influence over or prejudice of the inhabitants of the county may be controverted by the adverse party and the court is entitled to hear evidence on the…”
Stemmler v. Einstein, 297 S.W.2d 467 (Mo. 1957). · cites it 14× “But, although it constitutes a legal subdivision of the State and exercises such governmental functions as are generally exercised by the one hundred fourteen counties *470 of this State, the City of St.”
State Ex Rel. City of St. Louis v. Kinder, 698 S.W.2d 4 (Mo. 1985). · cites it 3× “See also, Section 1.080, RSMo 1978. In adopting Section 508.”
State v. Luckett, 770 S.W.2d 399 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “§ 1.080, RSMo 1986. Defendant’s motion to quash did not allege that § 565.”
Gramex Corp. v. Von Romer, 603 S.W.2d 521 (Mo. 1980). · cites it 2× “§ 1.080, RSMo 1978. Section 1.140, RSMo 1978 states: “Severability of statute provisions.”
City of Bridgeton v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 788 S.W.2d 285 (Mo. 1990). “See § 1.080, and Official Manual of the State of Missouri 1989-90.”
Morley v. Ryan, 461 S.W.2d 7 (Mo. 1970). · cites it 2× “1945; § 1.080, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S. The constitutional provision requires only that magistrates whose jurisdiction is coextensive with the county shall live in the county.”
Thomas v. Boeger, 306 S.W.2d 336 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957). “Nor are we bound by § 1.080 to construe the words “county” or “county courts” occurring in § 221.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.