Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 476
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 476.270 (2026)

Expenditures of court to be paid out of county treasury

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

  476.270.  Expenditures of court to be paid out of county treasury — exceptions. — All expenditures accruing in the circuit courts, except salaries and clerk hire which is payable by the state, except all expenditures accruing in the municipal divisions of the circuit court, and except as otherwise provided by law, shall be paid out of the treasury of the county in which the court is held in the same manner as other demands.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 2102, A.L. 1945 p. 812, A.L. 1978 H.B. 1634)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 1940; 1919 § 2438; 1909 § 3958

Effective 1-02-79

(1984) A judgment against a circuit court in a Title VII action was considered an "expenditure accruing in the circuit courts" within the meaning of this section, and the county was therefore required to pay the judgment. Goodwin v. Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Mo. (8th Cir.), 741 F.2d 1087.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1973–2021 · leading case: Meyer v. Meyer, 842 S.W.2d 184 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Meyer v. Meyer, 842 S.W.2d 184 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 9× “4, the trial court did not enter a "money judgment" against County. Rather, the trial court taxed the GAL fees as costs to be paid by County.”
Cates v. Webster, 727 S.W.2d 901 (Mo. 1987). · cites it 8× “Section 476.270, RSMo 1986 (emphasis added).”
St. Louis Cnty. v. Simon, 687 S.W.2d 896 (Mo. 1985). · cites it 8× “Petitioners contend the Commission erred in holding that respondents demonstrated the reasonableness and necessity of the budget requests because the attorneys’ fees in question are not expenditures the County is legally obligated to pay under section 476.270, RSMo 1978;…”
Stewart v. St. Louis Cnty., 630 S.W.2d 127 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 4× “Plaintiff made demand upon the county defendants for payment of his fees pursuant to § 476.270, RSMo. 1978 (all further references to sections are to RSMo.”
State ex rel. State, Dep't of Soc. Servs., Fam. Support Div. v. Campbell, 386 S.W.3d 229 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “040, our courts have held that the county treasury where the circuit court sits is obligated to pay the cost pursuant to section 476.270, addressing the "expenditures of courts to be paid out of county treasury.”
Lincoln Cnty. Comm'n v. Forty-Fifth Jud. Circuit, 528 S.W.3d 357 (Mo. 2017). · cites it 2× “The 45th Circuit filed a motion with this Court on February 7, 2017, asking the Court to compel the County Commission, pursuant to section 476.270, to pay the attorneys’ fees accrued since the case was submitted to the Judicial Finance Commission, Any attorneys’ fees not billed…”
State ex rel. Mennemeyer v. Lincoln Cnty., 553 S.W.3d 368 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “The Presiding Judge argues that § 476.270 imposes a non-discretionary duty on the part of the County to pay her attorney fees associated with the enforcement of the Circuit Court's budget expenditures.”
Matter of Additional Magistrates, Etc., 580 S.W.2d 288 (Mo. 1979). · cites it 2× “Louis County alleged that under § 476.270, RSMo 1969 and § 476.020, V.A.M.”
Smith v. Thirty-Seventh Jud. Circuit of Missouri, 847 S.W.2d 755 (Mo. 1993). · cites it 2× “Section 476.270. It is the circuit court that coordinates payment for the costs of the circuit court.”
In re 1983 Budget for The Circuit Court of St. Louis Cnty., 665 S.W.2d 943 (Ky. 1984). “1983, and which is not an expense of the circuit court for which the county is responsible under § 476.270, RSMo 1978; and (3) the item requested by respondents constitutes a state mandated increase in the level of activity required of St.”
Niederlander v. St. Louis Cnty., 580 S.W.2d 288 (Mo. 1979). · cites it 2× “Louis County alleged that under § 476.270, RSMo 1969 and § 476.020, V.A.M.”
The Bd. of Commissioners of the Cnty. of Franklin, State of Missouri, Tim Brinker, Presiding Comm'r, Todd Boland, First Dist. Comm'r, Dave Hinson, Second Dist. Comm'r, & Angela Gibson, Auditor of the Cnty. of Franklin, State of Missouri v. Twentieth Jud. Circuit of the State of Missouri by The Honorable I.I. Lamke, Presiding Judge (Mo. 2021). · cites it 8× “It argues section 476.270 requires the Franklin County Commission to pay these fees because Franklin County is one of the three counties comprising the Twentieth Circuit and section 476.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
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.