Effective 28 Aug 1953

536.150. Review by injunction or original writ, when — scope. — 1. When any administrative officer or body existing under the constitution or by statute or by municipal charter or ordinance shall have rendered a decision which is not subject to administrative review, determining the legal rights, duties or privileges of any person, including the denial or revocation of a license, and there is no other provision for judicial inquiry into or review of such decision, such decision may be reviewed by suit for injunction, certiorari, mandamus, prohibition or other appropriate action, and in any such review proceeding the court may determine the facts relevant to the question whether such person at the time of such decision was subject to such legal duty, or had such right, or was entitled to such privilege, and may hear such evidence on such question as may be properly adduced, and the court may determine whether such decision, in view of the facts as they appear to the court, is unconstitutional, unlawful, unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious or involves an abuse of discretion; and the court shall render judgment accordingly, and may order the administrative officer or body to take such further action as it may be proper to require; but the court shall not substitute its discretion for discretion legally vested in such administrative officer or body, and in cases where the granting or withholding of a privilege is committed by law to the sole discretion of such administrative officer or body, such discretion lawfully exercised shall not be disturbed.

2. Nothing in this section shall apply to contested cases reviewable pursuant to sections 536.100 to 536.140.

3. Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair any power to take summary action lawfully vested in any such administrative officer or body, or to limit the jurisdiction of any court or the scope of any remedy available in the absence of this section.

­­--------

(L. 1953 p. 678 §§ 1, 2, 3)

(1972) Where county ordinance provided no appeal from ruling of Board of Building Appeals, relator was entitled to writ of certiorari to compel the board to certify a sufficiently complete record of proceedings of basis leading to board's decision including name and identity of witnesses and at least a summary of their testimony. State ex rel. Walmar Investment Co. v. Armstrong (A.), 477 S.W.2d 730.

(1975) School district has no right to appeal decision of county board of equalization. State ex rel. St. Francois County School Dist. R-III v. Lalumondier (Mo.), 518 S.W.2d 638.

(1979) Mandamus was remedy when city council denied a liquor license under a municipal code when all conditions were met and was not a "contested" case. State ex rel. Keeven v. City of Hazelwood, et al. (A.), 585 S.W.2d 557.