Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

State ex rel. Stoyanoff v. Berkeley

Supreme Court of Missouri
458 S.W.2d 305 (1970)


Facts

The City of Ladue enacted ordinances that created an architectural board (board) to review and approve designs for buildings in the city prior to construction. The board was made up of architects and followed strict procedures, involving public hearings and notice, before approving or denying proposals. Stoyanoff owned land in the city and proposed to build a house. The house was of a more modern design than the other houses in the neighborhood, which were very traditional. Stoyanoff's plans complied with all city zoning regulations and ordinances. Nevertheless, the board denied the building permit. At Stoyanoff's request, the state (Stoyanoff) (plaintiff) brought an action against Berkeley (defendant), the building commissioner, claiming that the regulations constituted an arbitrary and capricious exercise of police power. Stoyanoff claimed that the regulations were unconstitutionally vague and gave no guidance to the board. Further, Stoyanoff argued that the property use restrictions caused an effective taking of property without due process of law, in violation of the Missouri State Constitution. At the trial, a developer testified that homes in the area would lose $60,000 to $85,000 in value if Stoyanoff were allowed to build the home. This is largely due to the fact that LaDue is an expensive suburb with large residential lots and very little commercial or industrial activity. The trial court granted summary judgment to Stoyanoff and issued a peremptory writ of mandamus compelling Berkleley to issue the building permit. Berkeley appealed to the Supreme Court of Missouri.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Pritchard, Commr.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 219,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.