516.500. Legislative bills, actions on procedural defect in enactment, time limitations, exceptions. — No action alleging a procedural defect in the enactment of a bill into law shall be commenced, had or maintained by any party later than the adjournment of the next full regular legislative session following the effective date of the bill as law, unless it can be shown that there was no party aggrieved who could have raised the claim within that time. In the latter circumstance, the complaining party must establish that he or she was the first person aggrieved or in the class of first persons aggrieved, and that the claim was raised not later than the adjournment of the next full regular legislative session following any person being aggrieved. In no event shall an action alleging a procedural defect in the enactment of a bill into law be allowed later than five years after the bill or the pertinent section of the bill which is challenged becomes effective.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case:
Schaefer v. Koster, 342 S.W.3d 299 (Mo. 2011).
Schaefer v. Koster, 342 S.W.3d 299 (Mo. 2011).
· cites it 24× “As the frequency of litigation increases, even with the short statute of limitations that is provided in § 516.500, RSMo 2000, there may come a time when this Court should reconsider whether the judicial doctrine of severance has served to support and protect the Missouri…”
Coop. Home Care, Inc. v. City of St. Louis, 514 S.W.3d 571 (Mo. 2017).
· cites it 13× “This Court reaffirms that the City was not barred from raising the violation of article III, section 23 as a defense even though the statute of limitations set out in section 516.500, RSMo 2000, has expired because that limitations period does not apply to raising as a defense…”
St. Louis Cnty. v. Prestige Travel, Inc., 344 S.W.3d 708 (Mo. 2011).
· cites it 2× “As the frequency of litigation increases, even with the short statute of limitations that is provided in § 516.500, RSMo 2000, there may come a time when this Court should reconsider whether the judicial doctrine of severance has served to support and protect the Missouri…”
LeBeau v. Commissioners of Franklin Cnty., 422 S.W.3d 284 (Mo. 2014).
· cites it 2× “Koster, this Court held that § 516.500, RSMo 2000, "which places a [time] limit upon when an 'action' can be ‘commenced, had, or maintained’ to challenge procedural irregularities in the enactment of a law, does not apply to a criminal defendant who raises a challenge to the…”
Legends Bank v. State, 361 S.W.3d 383 (Mo. 2012).
· cites it 2× “Section 516.500 provides: No action alleging a procedural defect in the enactment of a bill into law shall be commenced, had or maintained by any party later than the adjournment of the next full regular legislative session following the effective date of the bill as law, unless…”
Sernovitz v. Dershaw, 127 A.3d 783 (Pa. 2015).
“This suggested bright-line rule is based on a Missouri statute to similar effect, see Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.500 , which additionally contains a proviso that "[i]n no event shall an action *790 alleging a procedural defect .”
Arthur L. LeBeau, Jr. v. Commissioners of Franklin Cnty., Missouri (Mo. 2014).
· cites it 2× “500, RSMo 2000, "which places a [time] limit upon when an 'action' can be 'commenced, had, or maintained' to challenge procedural irregularities in the enactment of a law, does not apply to a criminal defendant who raises a challenge to the statute as a defense in the criminal…”
St. Charles Cnty. Convention & Sports Facilities Auth. v. Mydler, 950 S.W.2d 668 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “The trial court denied Appellants’ request for leave to amend their answer, holding that the request was untimely and that the matter appeared to be barred in any event by the statute of limitations set forth in Section 516.500. Appellants concede that permission to file an…”
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.