Mo. Rev. Stat. § 99.300
This is the official text of Mo. Rev. Stat. § 99.300, part of Missouri’s Rev. Stat — part of the compiled statutory law of Missouri, published by the state as "Rev. Stat." Browse the sections below, each linked to its official government source.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
99.300 Citation of law.
Official statutory text
99.300. Citation of law. — Sections 99.300 to 99.660 shall be known and may be cited as the "Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority Law".
(L. 1951 p. 300 § 1) (1954) This law is constitutional. State on Inf. Dalton v. Land Clearance for Redev. Auth. 364 Mo. 974, 270 S.W.2d 44; (1954) Land Clearance for Redev. Auth. v. City of St. Louis (Mo.), 270 S.W.2d 58. (1964) Election of city by resolution and vote of people, to come under this law could not be revoked by initiative proceedings since law was not enacted for solely municipal objectives but for state purposes as well, and law remains effective until legislature repeals it or provides by statute for means of withdrawal. Anderson v. Smith (A.), 377 S.W.2d 554. (1966) Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority Law, §§ 99.300 to 99.660, and the Urban Redevelopment Corporation Law, chapter 353 do not violate the constitutional provisions prohibiting the taking of private property for public use without consent of owner. Annbar Associates v. West Side Redevelopment Corp. (Mo.), 397 S.W.2d 635. (1968) Where redevelopment authority had condemned plaintiff's land and was now owner and possessor, plaintiff had no legally protectable interest and there was no justiciable controversy for plaintiff to maintain action for declaratory judgment on question of authority's compliance with statutory requirements. Brooks v. Land Clearance for Redevelopment Auth. (A.), 425 S.W.2d 481.
(L. 1951 p. 300 § 1) (1954) This law is constitutional. State on Inf. Dalton v. Land Clearance for Redev. Auth. 364 Mo. 974, 270 S.W.2d 44; (1954) Land Clearance for Redev. Auth. v. City of St. Louis (Mo.), 270 S.W.2d 58. (1964) Election of city by resolution and vote of people, to come under this law could not be revoked by initiative proceedings since law was not enacted for solely municipal objectives but for state purposes as well, and law remains effective until legislature repeals it or provides by statute for means of withdrawal. Anderson v. Smith (A.), 377 S.W.2d 554. (1966) Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority Law, §§ 99.300 to 99.660, and the Urban Redevelopment Corporation Law, chapter 353 do not violate the constitutional provisions prohibiting the taking of private property for public use without consent of owner. Annbar Associates v. West Side Redevelopment Corp. (Mo.), 397 S.W.2d 635. (1968) Where redevelopment authority had condemned plaintiff's land and was now owner and possessor, plaintiff had no legally protectable interest and there was no justiciable controversy for plaintiff to maintain action for declaratory judgment on question of authority's compliance with statutory requirements. Brooks v. Land Clearance for Redevelopment Auth. (A.), 425 S.W.2d 481.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Need a lawyer in Missouri?
Find a Missouri lawyer
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.