305.190. Declaration of acquisition of land a public necessity. — Any lands acquired, owned, controlled or occupied by such cities, villages, towns or counties for the purposes enumerated in sections 305.170 and 305.180 hereof shall and are hereby declared to be acquired, owned, controlled, and occupied for a public purpose and as a matter of public necessity, and such cities, villages, towns, or counties shall have the right to acquire property for such purpose or purposes under the power of eminent domain as and for a public necessity.
Notes of Decisions
City of Kansas City v. Hon, 972 S.W.2d 407 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 7× “” § 305.190 RSMo 1994. The issue here is whether the circuit court erred in determining that the condemnation of the eight tracts at issue in this case was not for a public purpose and was not a matter of public necessity.”
City of Washington v. Warren Cnty., 899 S.W.2d 863 (Mo. 1995).
· cites it 5× “Furthermore, the County contends that the condemnation power authorized in § 305.190 is limited to condemnation of property within the city’s borders.”
City of Gainesville v. Morrison Fertilizer, Inc., 158 S.W.3d 872 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).
“2d at 414 ; § 305.190. Therefore, the dispositive question here is whether a municipality’s acquisition of such property by adverse possession constitutes a constitutional taking of the property so as to require that just compensation be paid.”
City of Kansas City v. Unknown & Unrepresented Persons, 297 S.W.3d 616 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).
“” § 305.190. In its first point, City claims that the legislature’s declaration that control of airport land is for a public purpose and as a matter of public necessity is, in and of itself, sufficient to establish good cause under section 214.”
In re Removal of Human Remains, 297 S.W.3d 616 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).
“" § 305.190. In its first point, City claims that the legislature's declaration that control of airport land is for a public purpose and as a matter of public necessity is, in and of itself, sufficient to establish good cause under section 214.”
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.