Effective 28 Aug 2007

432.070. Contracts, execution of by counties, towns — form of contract. — No county, city, town, village, school township, school district or other municipal corporation shall make any contract, unless the same shall be within the scope of its powers or be expressly authorized by law, nor unless such contract be made upon a consideration wholly to be performed or executed subsequent to the making of the contract; and such contract, including the consideration, shall be in writing and dated when made, and shall be subscribed by the parties thereto, or their agents authorized by law and duly appointed and authorized in writing.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 3349, A.L. 2005 S.B. 462, A.L. 2007 S.B. 22)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 2962; 1919 § 2164; 1909 § 2778

CROSS REFERENCE:

Execution of county contracts, 50.660

(1961) Where city's "Notice to Bidders" required a lump sum bid for construction of sewerage system "including approximately 18,000 cubic yards of earth work" for lagoon, whereas the completion of the project actually required 36,000 cubic yards of earth, the contractor was entitled to recover in an action which is sui generis but which sounds in tort, and contract statute did not apply. Clark v. City of Humansville, Mo. (A.), 348 S.W.2d 369.

(1963) Where engineers performed services in connection with construction additional to that covered by terms of contract between city and engineers, out-of-pocket expenses incurred by engineers in connection therewith were not payable on ground of emergency situation justifying omission of written contract. Needles v. Kansas City (Mo.), 371 S.W.2d 300.

(1966) The terms of this section are expressly made applicable to counties, and the requirement that the terms of contracts therein referred to be in writing is mandatory and not merely directory. Thies v. St. Louis County (Mo.), 402 S.W.2d 376.

(1967) The requirements of this section are mandatory, not directory, and where there was no express written contract giving a water district exclusive right to furnish and sell water in the district, no such contract can be implied. Jackson Co. Public Water Supply District No. 1 v. Ong Aircraft Corp., 409 S.W.2d 226.

(1970) This section is mandatory and not merely directory. Hoevelman v. Reorganized Sch. D. R. 2 of Crawford Co. (A.), 452 S.W.2d 298.

(1975) Held that ordinance which authorized mayor to enter contract with state highway commission but silent as to costs or details was not a valid authorization. State ex rel. State Highway Commission v. City of Sullivan (A.), 529 S.W.2d 186.

(1976) Contract of city with state highway commission whereby city agreed to pay fifty percent of the right-of-way costs of highway through city, estimated in the contract to be $32,500, was not ultra vires in that it did not specify exact amount of the consideration as required by this section since standard was provided whereby the consideration to be paid by city would be definitely determined. State ex rel. Highway Commission v. City of Washington (Mo.), 533 S.W.2d 555.

(1976) Held, contract not containing required language is void and city cannot be held liable on theory of ratification, estoppel, implied contract or quantum meruit. Missouri International Investigators, Inc. v. City of Pacific (A.), 545 S.W.2d 684.

(1977) Held, requirement that teacher's contract be in writing is mandatory and must be pleaded and proved. Neal v. Junior College District of East Central Mo. (A.), 550 S.W.2d 580.