Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 172
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 172.010 (2026)

University established

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

  172.010.  University established — how governed. — A university is hereby instituted in this state, the government whereof shall be vested in a board of curators.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 10782)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 9625; 1919 § 11522; 1909 § 11096

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1966–2017 · leading case: Tribune Publ'g Co. v. Curators of the Univ. of Missouri, 661 S.W.2d 575 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tribune Publ'g Co. v. Curators of the Univ. of Missouri, 661 S.W.2d 575 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 6× “” (emphasis added) Although not cited by appellants, § 172.010, RSMo 1969 (now § 172.010, RSMo 1978), parallels the constitutional provision, and reads as follows: “A university is hereby instituted in this state, the government whereof shall be vested in a board of curators.”
State Ex Rel. Curators of the Univ. of Missouri v. Neill, 397 S.W.2d 666 (Mo. 1966). · cites it 2× “” The general assembly, in recognition of the broad grant of constitutional power, has also provided in § 172.010, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S., that “the government” of the University shall be vested in the Board of Curators.”
Suppes v. Curators of the Univ. of Missouri, 529 S.W.3d 825 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Factual and Procedural Background Suppes’s pleadings, which are taken as true for the purposes of this appeal, asserted that the University is a body politic created pursuant to the Missouri Constitution and section 172.010. 1 It operates a campus in Columbia where Suppes is…”
Koen v. Long, 302 F. Supp. 1383 (E.D. Mo. 1969). “03); (2) that he is guided by the City Ordinances in the conduct of his court (but § 172.010 et seq. governing city court operations cannot be said to contain any procedural guides); (3) that no set procedure exists by which accused persons, not already represented by counsel,…”
Thielecke v. United States, 491 F. Supp. 1343 (E.D. Mo. 1980). “Plaintiffs argue that under these regulations the University does not qualify as a “state or local government”, which is given priority behind only the federal government, but rather qualifies as a non-profit institution, to which plaintiffs’ predecessors’ priority was superior.…”
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.