Carmack v. Director, Missouri Department of Agriculture

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the bill violated the single-subject challenge and the state’s proposed definition “prove[d] too much”
• finding that “economic development” was too broad and amorphous to describe subject of a pending bill
• rejecting as too broad the state’s definition of economic development as “any activity that indirectly promotes or protects portions of the Missouri economy”
• finding a constitutional provision was mandatory rather than directory where it used the word “shall”
• explaining when an amorphous title renders a bill’s subject uncertain, but the party raises only a single subject challenge, this Court may examine either the constitution and its organized subjects or the contents of the bill as originally filed to determine the subject
• explaining when an amorphous title renders a bill’s subject uncertain, but the party raises only a single subject challenge, this Court may examine either the constitution and its organized subjects or the contents of the bill as originally filed to determine the subject

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).