226.500. Purpose of law. — The general assembly finds and declares that outdoor advertising is a legitimate commercial use of private property adjacent to the interstate and primary highway systems and that it is necessary to regulate and control same to promote highway safety, to promote convenience and enjoyment of highway travel, and to preserve the natural scenic beauty of highways and adjacent areas. The general assembly further declares it to be the policy of this state that the erection and maintenance of outdoor advertising in areas adjacent to the interstate and primary highway systems be regulated in accordance with sections 226.500 to 226.600 and rules and regulations promulgated by the state highways and transportation commission pursuant thereto and may confer with the department of public safety regarding highway safety, the department of economic development and the state division of tourism with regard to promoting the convenience and enjoyment of highway travel, and the departments of conservation and natural resources regarding the preservation of the natural scenic beauty of adjacent areas.
Notes of Decisions
State Ex Rel. Nat'l Advert. Co. v. State High. Comm'n, 624 S.W.2d 453 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 8× “The enactment of the Billboards Law [§§ 226.500 through 226.600, RSMo 1978] subjects outdoor advertisement structures installed within a prescribed proximity to a primary or interstate highway to the regulation and licensure of the State Highway Commission.”
The Lamar Co., LLC v. City of Columbia, Missouri, 512 S.W.3d 774 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 4× “Section 226.500 of the Missouri Billboard Act then in effect directed that “the erection and maintenance of outdoor advertising in areas adjacent to the interstate and primary highway systems [shall] be regulated in accordance with sections 226.”
Nat'l Advert. Co. v. Missouri State High. & Transp. Comm'n, 862 S.W.2d 953 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 5× “Louis City Zoning Ordinance # 60704, which prohibits the construction of any new off-premises commercial signs as of March 11, 1988, is valid and not preempted by the Missouri Billboards Act § 226.500 to § 226.600 RSMo. Cum.Supp.1990 (partially revised 1992), which permits said…”
State Ex Rel. Ad Trend, Inc. v. City of Platte City, 272 S.W.3d 201 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 7× “That statute provides that “[a]ny city or county shall have the authority to adopt regulations with respect to outdoor advertising that are more restrictive than the height, size, lighting and spacing provisions of sections 226.500 to 226.600, RSMo.” § 71.”
Nat'l Advert. Co. v. State High. Comm'n, 549 S.W.2d 536 (Mo. Ct. App. 1977).
· cites it 4× “Plaintiff appeals from an adverse declaratory judgment and denial of a permanent injunction arising from proposed actions by defendant pursuant to the Missouri Billboards law, Sections 226.500 to 226.600 RSMo 1969. 1 It is initially necessary to determine what matters raised on…”
Whitman v. State High. Comm'n of Missouri, 400 F. Supp. 1050 (W.D. Mo. 1975).
· cites it 5× “(1969) provided as follows: “Unlawful advertising shall be any sign, display, or device which violates the provisions of sections 226.500 to 226.600 (the 1965 Act).”
Drury Dev. Corp. v. State High. Comm'n of Missouri, 637 S.W.2d 354 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 8× “The Commission found the signs subject to removal without compensation because erected and maintained without permits as required by §§ 226.500 to 226.600, RSMo 1978. 1 The circuit court affirmed the decisions of the Commission.”
Superior Outdoor Advert. Co. v. State High. Comm'n of Missouri, 641 S.W.2d 480 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 3× “These three consolidated appeals are from judgments of the circuit court affirming orders of the State Highway Commission of Missouri, (now the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission), which required appellant Superior Outdoor Advertising Company to remove certain…”
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.