Case summaries for April 26-May 2, 2024

Appellate | Civil | Criminal | Election | Employment security | Evidence | Family | Insurance | Post-conviction

Appellate

Evidence contrary to judgment ignored
Statutes provided an action for partition of land in kind or by distribution of proceeds from a sale and, in the latter case, respondent was entitled to recover taxes, insurance, repairs, and improvements. Appellate courts presumed that circuit courts weigh all relevant evidence and did not re-weigh any evidence, so evidence contrary to the judgment was irrelevant on appeal. Substantial and competent evidence supported the circuit court’s order distributing the proceeds except as to one expenditure that the circuit court duplicated. Remanded for a judgment consistent with the opinion.
(Overview summary)
Ace A. Carpenter and Sandra Carpenter vs. Kathleen r. Carpenter
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District - WD86351

Appellant’s opening brief must describe preservation of error
Appellant’s brief must set forth how appellant preserved every claimed error and addressing that matter for the first time in a reply brief did not give respondent the chance to argue it, so the Missouri Court of Appeals did not address it. Appellant’s arguments offered no “meaningful analysis based upon specific legal reasons and specific factual findings made.” Appeal dismissed.
In Re: The Matter of: O.S.M., a minor, by Next Friend N.T.M. and N.T.M., Individually, Plaintiff-Appellant v. C.N.M., Defendant-Respondent In Re: The Matter of: N.S.M., a minor, by Next Friend C.N.M. and C.N.M., Individually, Plaintiff-Respondent v. N.T.M., Defendant-Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals-Southern District - SD38078 and SD38079 (consolidated)

Civil

Judicial estoppel explained
Judicial estoppel barred a party from taking a position clearly inconsistent with that party’s position in a separate proceeding. Disability proceedings employed differing standards, which determined whether positions taken in those proceedings were clearly inconsistent. Appellant employer did not show that any statement of respondent employee was inconsistent with any other statement in the context of a separate proceeding in the context of the standards applicable to, and time of, such proceeding. The circuit court applied the statute that capped future economic damages, so appellant showed no prejudice from the instruction on future economic damages, including denial of remittitur. Remanded to determine award of attorney fees on appeal.
(Overview summary)
Jeanne Johnson vs. City of Kansas City, Missouri
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District - WD85851

Denial of motion to set aside judgment affirmed
The challenged ruling refused to set aside a default judgment on appellant’s motion. The motion cited a meritorious defense and good cause. Such a motion, even when filed within 30 days of judgment’s entry, constitutes a separate action and not an authorized after-trial motion. As to good cause, that included negligence but not recklessness. Recklessness described appellant’s allegations in support of its motion: Appellant had internally misrouted the petition for damages in circuit court as a workers’ compensation claim. And its supporting evidence was unclear, and even internally inconsistent, which supported a circuit court finding against that evidence’s credibility. The default judgment’s award of punitive damages is not at issue on appeal of the judgment denying the motion to set aside.
(Overview summary)
David Steele, Respondent, v. Johnson Controls, Inc., Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100193

Personal jurisdiction reviewed de novo
Rule allowed a circuit court to set aside a default judgment on a showing of a meritorious defense to the underlying claim and good cause for the default. Good cause for the default included lack of service, because that resulted in lack of personal jurisdiction, but a finding on personal jurisdiction is subject to de novo review. A return showing service was subject to rebuttal only on clear and convincing evidence, which required more than uncorroborated testimony from the person presumptively served. Circuit court’s judgment, setting aside a default judgment, reversed.
(Overview summary)
T. Westfall Plaza WCR MO, LLC, Appellant, v. SJB Restaurant Grp., LLC, and Cortez Burnett, Respondents.
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED111960

Criminal

Parole eligibility discussed
Statutes, governing the minimum portion of a sentence that a defendant must serve before becoming eligible for parole, aggregated the minimums for consecutive sentences subject to a cap. Appellate court opinions interpreted such statutes, holding that statutes specific to armed criminal action constituted a specific exception to general provisions. That holding applied retroactively to persons already sentenced, even if it increased the sentence, without transgressing constitutional provisions related to ex post facto laws and retrospective legislation, because those provisions applied only to legislation. The legislation and sentences imposed under that legislation existed before the opinions and remained unchanged after the opinions, and defendant had no liberty interest in an incorrectly calculated parole eligibility date.
(Overview summary)
Lawrence G. Belk vs. Missouri Department of Corrections, Et al.
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District - WD86497

Jail time credit denied
Statutes credited defendant’s time in jail for an offense, before sentencing for that offense, against a sentence of confinement for the offense; but only once as to consecutive sentences. Judgment on the pleadings for the state affirmed.
(Overview summary)
Aaron Barker vs. Missouri Department of Corrections, Et Al.
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District - WD86461

Appointed counsel unnecessary for an initial appearance or arraignment
Constitutional provisions required appointed counsel at all critical stages of a criminal action but that did not include an initial appearance or arraignment. Rules did not require appointment of counsel until a determination of indigency, and expressly allowed an initial appearance without counsel, so no error occurred when circuit court conducted an initial appearance without appointed counsel. Appellant showed no prejudice from a delay in appointing counsel until after the deadline for an automatic change of judge.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. James Eugene Logan, Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100325

Bail hearing without counsel okay
In a criminal action, appointed counsel is due on a showing of indigency for any critical stage. Critical stages include neither an initial appearance, nor an arraignment without a guilty plea, nor a bail hearing. Appellant showed no prejudice from a delayed bail hearing. When defendant raised self-defense, defendant’s knowledge of the victim’s reputation for violence was admissible, but a third person’s knowledge was not. Statutes entitled defendant to jury sentencing, and the best practice for waiver included a hearing before submission, but no plain error occurred when a circuit judge determined the sentence without a jury on defendant’s “knowing and voluntary” request on the record.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Tiffany Mills, Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100303

Escape rule applied
The escape rule vindicated the administration of justice, discouraged escape, and encouraged voluntary surrender. Six months of failure to appear for a probation revocation hearing and committing criminal offenses in addition to the offenses underlying the present appeal, support application of the escape rule. Appeal dismissed.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. James Eugene Logan, Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100265

Charges and amendment okay
An information that cites the offense without a perfect recitation of elements. An arraignment is a proceeding in which defendant receives the charging document, hears the substance of the charge, and enters a plea. Anything less does not constitute an arraignment, no matter what a docket entry says. But no appointment of counsel or transcript is then required. Even at an arraignment, failure to appoint counsel for an indigent defendant is not error unless prejudice results, and no transcript is required unless defendant waived counsel. An amendment to the degree of robbery charged did not affect defendant’s alibi, and defendant showed no prejudice from the omission of separate preliminary hearing. Loss of consciousness, subsequent beating, and resulting injuries supported a finding of serious physical injury.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Lorandis M. Phillips, Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100247

Dismissal reversed
The state filed an indictment, and the defense filed a motion to dismiss for insufficiency, on which the standard was whether the indictment “alleges the essential elements of the offense and clearly apprises the defendant of the facts constituting the offense.” Instead, the circuit court heard evidence outside the pleadings and ruled on the merits, which it had no authority to do. Dismissal reversed.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Appellant, vs. Ashley Colville, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100212

Rule of completeness inapplicable to video fragments
The defense objected to the admission of a security camera recording under the rule of completeness. “'The rule of completeness only applies when the item sought to be introduced is part of a greater whole' and the ‘parts introduced to complete the whole … relate to the same subject matter’ as that previously admitted.” Because the device only recorded in 30-second bursts, there was no greater whole, and the rule of completeness did not apply. A motion for acquittal made before the circuit court instructs the jury depends on whether the evidence meets the elements of the offense charged, not on the content of a verdict director. By failing to object to the verdict director’s language without inadvertence or negligence, and arguing the disputed language in closing, defendant waived plain error review. An instruction on defendant’s age was unnecessary because it was a mitigating factor in the punishment phase, on which defendant had the burden of proof, not an element of the offense in the guilt phase.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Troy Jackson-Bey, Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100188

Appointed counsel for arraignment unnecessary
Statutes provided that appointment of counsel occurred on a determination of indigency by the public defender, not the circuit court. Rule governing initial appearance allowed an initial appearance without counsel. Constitutional provisions granted the right to counsel at all critical stages of a criminal action, but an arraignment was not a critical stage when defendant pleads not guilty, unless defendant could show prejudice from counsel’s absence. Rule required a transcript of an arraignment only if defendant appeared without counsel and waived appointment of counsel, which defendant did not show. The defendant did not show that a mental examination was necessary to determine culpability or ability to participate in defense. The defendant could not expand an objection made in circuit court in the Missouri Court of Appeals.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Robert A. Woolery, Appellant.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100170

Constitutional challenges waived
The same conduct was the basis for multiple charges including possession of a controlled substance and unlawful use of a weapon. To those charges, defendant entered an unconditional guilty plea, waived appeal, and received a separate sentence for each. That plea waived constitutional challenges, including defendant’s argument: that separate sentences for multiple offenses arising from one event violated due process, which defendant raised for the first time on appeal. The defendant’s argument on appeal was merely colorable so it did not require transfer to the Supreme Court of Missouri. Convictions affirmed.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Victor L. Kates, Appellant.
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED111457

Election

Inadequate fiscal note summary required new election
The state auditor must assess the fiscal impact of a ballot issue through the assembly of a fiscal note, in which the auditor solicits, and determines the credibility of, information from various government agencies. Any registered voter had standing to contest an election on a ballot issue. For constitutional amendments, the Supreme Court of Missouri had original jurisdiction. The availability of a pre-election action did not negate the availability of a post-election action. In such an action, an amended petition, curing the lack of verification, related back to the original petition. The Supreme Court of Missouri could, but need not, reconsider a motion to dismiss. The standard was “doubt on the validity of the initial election” from “irregularities of sufficient magnitude[.]” Such irregularities include the fiscal note summary. The fiscal note summary had to summarize the fiscal note fairly and accurately, but materially misstated and misrepresented the fiscal note, in that it ignored the fiscal note’s unrefuted information on fiscal impact in the affected city. The magnitude of that omission cast doubt on the result. The remedy in a post-election contest was a new election with a new fiscal note summary.
(Overview summary)
Quinton Lucas, Plaintiff, vs. Missouri Secretary of State John R. Ashcroft and Missouri State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick, Defendants.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC99931

Employment security

Due process provided
“In an administrative proceeding, due process is provided by affording parties the opportunity to be heard in a meaningful manner [,]” but that does not require a hearing officer to admit unduly repetitious testimony, and claimant lost the opportunity to examine and cross-examine the employer only because claimant failed to subpoena the employer. Sufficient competent evidence supported a finding that claimant voluntarily quit his job without good cause attributable to work. Neither constructive discharge nor unsatisfactory workplace conditions constituted good cause. Denial of benefits affirmed.
(Overview summary)
John Blase, Appellant v. PriceWaterhouseCoopers, LLP, and Division of Employment Security, Respondents.
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED111971

Evidence

Disciplinary record admissible
Statute allowed any qualified person to offer an expert opinion but such opinion was subject to impeachment. In an action for personal injury, defendant testified as both a fact witness and a non-retained expert, so evidence of discipline against defendant’s professional license was relevant to defendant’s credibility. “As in most medical malpractice cases, the credibility of the witnesses is of the utmost importance. Excluding that evidence was prejudiced the plaintiffs by denying the jury an opportunity to assess it. The defendant’s judgment reversed.
(Overview summary)
Jimmie Sue Marchbank and John Marchbank, Appellants, v. Amit Chakrabarty, M.D., and Urology Clinics of North Alabama, P.C., d/b/a Poplar Bluff Urology, Respondents.
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED111426

Family

Termination of parental rights affirmed
Appellant raised issues on appeal not raised in circuit court, so there was no record on which to review them, even for plain error. Even if the juvenile office and Wayne County Children’s Division offered no services to appellant, those facts do not constitute circuit court error. Having affirmed one ground for termination, and one ground for termination being sufficient to affirm the judgment, the remaining point was moot, and the Missouri Court of Appeals chose not to reach it. Challenging only one of several findings on the children’s best interests leaves the unchallenged findings as support the circuit court’s conclusions on the children’s best interests. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment.
IN THE INTEREST OF M.L.P. and M.R.P., WAYNE COUNTY CHILDREN'S DIVISION, Respondent vs. A.N.B., Appellant 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Southern District - SD38069

Insurance

Actual notice no substitute for unambiguous policy provision
Courts enforced insurance contracts as written without regard to public policy. Title insurance policy’s covered risks included enforcement of ordinances as recorded by notice in the “Public Records.” Policy unambiguously defined public records as those filed with the recorder of deeds according to statute governing recording of documents, and actual notice was no substitute. Insured also sought a remedy for receiving unmarketable title but the policy expressly excluded land use ordinances from coverage. Partial summary judgment for insurer affirmed.
(Overview summary)
Sanford Sachtleben and Luciann Hruza, Appellants, vs. Alliant National Title Insurance Co., Respondent.
Supreme Court of Missouri - SC100238

Post-conviction

Self-defense instruction was sufficient
The elements of a claim for ineffective counsel included prejudice. No prejudice accrued when trial counsel offered no self-defense instruction mentioning domestic assault or any forcible felony because trial counsel did offer a self-defense instruction for protection against death or serious physical injury. And no self-defense instruction would have made any difference because the jury found that movant was the initial aggressor.
(Overview summary)
Terry L. Warren vs. State of Missouri
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District - WD86050