CHARLES BRANNUM and CHRIS BROWNING, and CSE ENTERPRISES, LLC v. CITY OF POPLAR BLUFF, MISSOURI, Defendant/Respondent.
2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 943
Mo. Ct. App.2014Background
- City operates a RICE NESHAP-regulated electrical generation plant and pursued compliance ahead of EPA deadline.
- City issued bids for the RICE NESHAP project; bids were CSE $735,500; Fairbanks $983,072; Farabee $1,050,567.
- City’s evaluator Williams determined none bids fully met specifications and invited corrections from bidders.
- Advisory Board recommended Fairbanks; City Council, by a 4–3 vote, awarded the contract to Fairbanks.
- CSE and others challenged the award by petition for writs, including mandamus and prohibition.
- Trial court ruled for City, denying relief; appeal focused on standing and mandamus viability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to appeal mandamus | CSE asserts standing as a losing bidder challenging fair opportunity. | City contends bidders lack standing to challenge award; only limited circumstances permit standing. | CSE lacks standing; no mandamus relief awarded |
| Merits of mandamus when standing exists | Mandamus would correct City’s purported improper award decision. | Council decision not arbitrary, capricious, or in bad faith; no abuse of discretion. | No mandamus because City decision not shown to be abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Simmons, 409 S.W.3d 538 (Mo. App. W.D.2013) (losing-bidder standing requires fair bidding and no fraud)
- State ex rel. Johnson v. Sevier, 98 S.W.2d 677 (Mo. 1936) (bidders have limited standing; contracts let to lowest and best bidder for public benefit)
- Metro Exp. Servs., Inc. v. City of Kansas City, 23 F.3d 1367 (8th Cir.1994) (rejected bidder standing when bidding process fair)
- E. Mo. Laborers Dist. Council v. St. Louis County, 781 S.W.2d 43 (Mo. banc 1989) (taxpayer standing to enforce public contracting integrity)
- LaMar Const. Co. v. Holt County R-II School Dist., 542 S.W.2d 568 (Mo.App.1976) (public officials must act in good faith; mandamus can cancel contract improper awards)
- State ex rel. Missouri Growth Ass’n v. State Tax Comm’n, 998 S.W.2d 786 (Mo. banc 1999) (mandamus discretionary; no right to writ where not warranted)
- State ex rel. Office of Pub. Counsel v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n of State, 236 S.W.3d 632 (Mo. banc 2007) (mandamus issued to enforce ministerial duty when appropriate)
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976) (trial findings supported by substantial evidence; standard of review)
- State ex rel. Lupo v. City of Wentzville, 886 S.W.2d 727 (Mo. App. E.D.1994) (standing and mandamus standards in public contracting)