{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"city-of-st-louis-mo","displayName":"City of St. Louis, MO","totalCases":1},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappd:ed112466:2024-11-05","opinionId":"d9443dbf-c725-5780-9c99-1b2dad2e8b01","slug":"double-aa-market-llc-appellant-v-city-of-st-louis-mo-respondent-112466","caseName":"Double AA Market, LLC, Appellant, v. City of St. Louis, MO, Respondent.","caseNumber":"ED112466","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2024-11-05","year":2024,"display_summary":"Double AA Market, LLC, sought a conditional use permit for a convenience store, which was denied by the City of St. Louis Board of Adjustment. Double AA then filed a declaratory judgment action challenging the City's alleged practice of \"aldermanic courtesy\" as unconstitutional. The circuit court dismissed the declaratory judgment action, concluding that a writ of certiorari under Section 89.110 was the exclusive remedy. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, holding that an adequate remedy at law was available through certiorari, thus precluding the declaratory judgment action.","primaryTopic":"civil-procedure","topicSlugs":["civil-procedure","administrative-law","other"],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=214277","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/double-aa-market-llc-appellant-v-city-of-st-louis-mo-respondent-112466","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: civil-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"},{"slug":"corporate","label":"Corporate Law","href":"/practice-areas/corporate","score":4,"source":"text","evidence":["text: llc"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/corporate"}],"role":"respondent"}]}