Section V Section 4

Constitution

Effective - 02 Sep 1976, see footnote   

  V Section 4.  Superior courts to control inferior courts — courts administrator, salary — reapportionment commission, appointment. — 1.  The supreme court shall have general superintending control over all courts and tribunals.  Each district of the court of appeals shall have general superintending control over all courts and tribunals in its jurisdiction.  The supreme court and districts of the court of appeals may issue and determine original remedial writs.  Supervisory authority over all courts is vested in the supreme court which may make appropriate delegations of this power.

  2.  The supreme court may appoint a state courts administrator and other staff to aid in the administration of the courts, and it shall appoint a clerk of the supreme court and may appoint other staff to aid in the administration of the business of the supreme court.  Each such appointee shall serve at the pleasure of the court.  The clerk's and administrator's salary shall be fixed by law.  All other appointees shall have salaries fixed by the court within the legislative limits of the appropriation made for that purpose.

  3.  In the event that six commissioners of the supreme court are not available to sit as a reapportionment commission as provided in sections 2, 3 and 7 of article III of the constitution of this state, a commission composed of six members appointed by the supreme court from among the judges of the court of appeals, shall serve in lieu of the commissioners of the supreme court.  No more than two members of any division of the court of appeals shall be appointed to the commission.

­­--------

Source: Const. of 1875, Art. VI, §§ 3, 12, 23; Amdt. of 1884, § 8 (Amended August 4, 1970) (Amended August 3, 1976).

(1951) Superintending control over inferior courts, when resorted to for an authority over and above that comprehended by ordinary common-law writs, is limited to compelling proper performance of purely ministerial duties. State ex rel. St. L. Boiler & Equip. Co. v. Gabbert (A.), 241 S.W.2d 79.

(1956) Prohibition in the Supreme Court is governed by the general law on the subject rather than by the civil code. Where writ was directed to judge of multiple judge circuit who made order which would result in excess of jurisdiction it bound all judges of such circuit and afforded due process. State ex rel. Siegel v. Strother, 365 Mo. 861, 289 S.W.2d 73.

(1956) Resident voters and taxpayers of school district entitled to writ of mandamus to compel board of education to hold election on proposed boundary change, although another petition for proposed boundary change involving same district but different land had previously been filed and although date specified in petition for election had passed. State ex rel. Dahm v. Goodin (A.), 295 S.W.2d 600.

(1957) Court of appeals held to have jurisdiction to issue and enforce original writ (prohibition) in a case involving a construction of the state constitution under the 1945 constitution. State ex rel. City of Mansfield v. Crain (A.), 301 S.W.2d 415.

(1958) Court of appeals in exercise of its superintending jurisdiction may issue original remedial writs even though constitutional or other issues within the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court are raised. State ex rel. Coffman v. Crain (A.), 308 S.W.2d 451.

(1959) Court of appeals had jurisdiction of case involving construction of state constitution which arose in connection with its original writ. State ex rel. City of Creve Coeur v. Weinstein (A.), 329 S.W.2d 399.