Opinion ID: 1561199
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Origin of the Open Courts Provision

Text: The Missouri Constitution's Bill of Rights, article I, section 14, provides: That the courts of justice shall be open to every person, and certain remedy afforded for every injury to person, property or character, and that right and justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay. This case presents the question of whether this open courts provision states a constitutional right or merely states an ideal to which our system aspires. An open courts provision has been in our state constitution since the first Missouri Constitution of 1820. Its origins are in Magna Carta, a document that evolved as the basic charter of English liberty after its original version was signed and sealed by King John of England in 1215. [5] The original language of Magna Carta  To none will we sell, to none will we deny, delay, right or justice [6]  reflected the concern that the courts of the era had fallen into disrepute for selling writs. [7] In Lord Coke's commentary on Magna Carta, the text quoted here underwent a radical change and was available to American constitutional drafters in a form close to the version now in the Missouri Constitution: [E]very Subject of this Realm, for injury done to him in [goods, land or person],... may take his remedy by the course of the Law, and have justice and right for the injury done him, freely without sale, fully without any denial, and speedily without delay. [8] It may be argued that the original Magna Carta language was directed only to courts. [9] However, in the 19th century, when our first constitution was adopted, the evil was renegade legislatures that had, for example, deprived injured creditors of their judicial remedies against debtors by passing legislation impairing existing contractual obligations. [10] In Missouri, barriers to a certain remedy for an injury can be erected by the courts themselves, or by the legislature. [11] An examination both of the history and the language of our constitution supports the conclusion that article I, section 14, applies against all impediments to fair judicial process, be they legislative or judicial in origin. [12] Missouri's version of the open courts provision has been strengthened twice since its adoption in our state's first constitution of 1820. Missouri's first constitution put the open courts provision in our Bill of Rights, which provided: That courts of justice ought to be open to every person, and certain remedy afforded for every injury to person, property, or character; and that right and justice ought to be administered without sale, denial, or delay.... MO. CONST. art. XIII, sec. 7 (1820) (emphasis added.) In the constitution of 1875, the provision reads: That courts of justice shall be open to every person, and certain remedy afforded for every injury to person, property or character; and that right and justice should be administered without sale, or delay. MO. CONST. art. II, sec. 10 (1875) (emphasis added). This version was added by amendment in the Constitutional Convention, but without elaboration as to any change in meaning. See DEBATES, MISSOURI CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION 1875, vol. II, 226-27. In the constitution of 1945, the word should was changed to shall. See MO. CONST. art. I, sec. 14 (1945) quoted above. One might question whether these changes reflect a change in meaning or merely reflect contemporary linguistic conventions. But when the words ought and should are replaced with the word shall it is difficult to escape the conclusion that our drafters changed a passage that could originally have been taken to be mere exhortation to a constitutional provision that is mandatory in tone and substance.