# Matthew v. Smith

> Supreme Court of Missouri · March 25, 1986 · 707 S.W.2d 411

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9777191

## Case

- **Full name:** Jon MATTHEW, Appellant, v. Elton SMITH, Et Al., Members of the Board of Zoning Adjustment, Etc., James Brandt and Susan Brandt, Respondents
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Missouri
- **Decided:** March 25, 1986
- **Citations:** 707 S.W.2d 411; 1986 Mo. LEXIS 270
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Blackmar
- **Judges:** Welliver, Higgins, Billings, Donnelly, Robertson, Rendlen, Blackmar
- **Cited by:** 45 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9777191

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that “[although all the requirements must be satisfied, it is generally held that unnecessary hardship is the principal basis on which a variance is granted” (quotation and brackets omitted)

## Opinion text

BLACKMAR, Judge,
concurring.
The property owner has laid the foundation for the grant of a variance by showing that two separate houses were located on a single lot at the time the zoning ordinance was adopted. There would be a substantial waste if habitable structures were required to be torn down. This showing should permit the Board to find, in its discretion, after hearing all evidence, that the tests of “unnecessary hardship” and “practical difficulties” are met.
Rate of return is an important consideration. Although initial cost may not be a controlling circumstance in determining the base from which reasonable return is to be calculated, it is a starting point. The Board was plainly wrong in denying the plaintiff the right to inquire about the initial cost. This error taints the hearing, and the order based on it cannot stand.
I concur, therefore, in the judgment of reversal and remand to the Board.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9777191. Public record. Not legal advice.