Case summaries for Aug. 22-28, 2025

Civil | Criminal | Employment | Family | Real estate

Civil

Class certification reversed 
Petitions under the Merchandising Practices Act did not have any allege contract between the plaintiffs and the defendants. In class actions, a circuit court’s certification of the class was subject to review for abuse of discretion. The circuit court abused its discretion by sua sponte certifying the class to include persons who prevailed on the merits of the action. The Missouri Court of Appeals reversed the order certifying the class for the circuit court to address the parties’ arguments, eliminate the incorrect language, and include only claims timely filed. 
(Overview summary) 
Temujin Kensu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Respondents, vs. Keefe Commissary Network, L.L.C., d/b/a Access Corrections, Appellant. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED113320

Criminal

Defense of others instruction not required 
To support the submission of an instruction on defense of others, a defendant had to raise the issue and present substantial supporting evidence, while the evidence showed that the defendant displayed no regard for the safety of another. And the jury did not even find for the defendant on self-defense, so the omission of an instruction on defense of others was not outcome-determinative. Plain error occurred when the sentence as written deviated from the sentence as announced in open court, so the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions and remanded the action to the circuit court for a correction nunc pro tunc. 
(Overview summary) 
State of Missouri vs. Terrance Andre Johnson, Jr. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District - WD87138

No plain error in denial of severance 
Joint trials could benefit defendants by assessing relative culpability and could avoid inconsistent verdicts. “The purpose of severance is to protect defendants in joint trials from being convicted on evidence that would be inadmissible against them in a separate trial[,]” so severance was necessary to prevent “spillover” of evidence from a co-defendant to a defendant. The instructions and verdicts showed that no such spillover occurred. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions. 
(Overview summary) 
State of Missouri vs. Maggie P Ybarra 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District – WD86611

Inconsistent verdicts and death of circuit judge discussed 
When verdicts are inconsistent, defendants must raise that issue in circuit court or waive appellate review. But only invited error waived the issue of inconsistent verdicts for an extraordinary remedy. The remedy for inconsistent verdicts in circuit court was to reject the verdicts and require further deliberation. But the circuit court ordered a new trial, for which the circuit court’s authority had lapsed. A rule governed new trials when circuit judges died after verdict and before judgment. So, the Missouri Court of Appeals made permanent its preliminary writs of prohibition, barring any further proceedings until the successor applied that rule. Double jeopardy would not occur as to those charges on which the jury rendered inconsistent verdicts nor those on which defendant sought a new trial. 
STATE OF MISSOURI EX REL. MELVIN ANDERSON, Relator v. HONORABLE MARK PREYER, Respondent and STATE OF MISSOURI EX REL. ATTORNEY GENERAL ANDREW BAILEY, Relator v. HONORABLE MARK PREYER, Respondent 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Southern District – SD38672 and SD38866

Employment

Defendant was exempt from human rights act 
On a motion for summary judgment, a party without the burden of proof could prevail by establishing facts, beyond a genuine dispute, that negated an element of its adversary’s claim. The Human Rights Act barred gender-based discrimination in employment but excluded tax-exempt bona fide private membership clubs. The defendant’s motion established that the defendant was a bona fide private membership club with evidence of “the selectivity of its membership, its membership control over its operations, its history, and its purposes.” The plaintiff’s evidence, that the defendant also hosted events open and advertised to the public, did not raise a genuine dispute as to that fact. The circuit court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that ruling. 
(Overview summary) 
Rayne Littlefield, Appellant, vs. Norman Rigdon Post 5896, Veterans of Foreign Wars of The United States, Inc., Respondent. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District – ED113095

Family

Contempt order not final 
Statutes alone determine whether a party had any right to, and whether an appellate court had authority to hear, an appeal. Appeals were generally possible only from final judgments, which did not describe orders of contempt until enforced. Enforcement of the appellant’s contempt order was by fine, on which the respondent had not attempted to execute, so the order was not subject to appeal. A ruling could also be subject to appeal if the matter ruled on was discrete from other pending matters and a circuit judge certified that there was no just reason for delay. A later order met none of those requirements. The Missouri Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal. 
(Overview summary) 
Donna J. Scalise, Respondent, vs. William J. Scalise, Appellant. 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Eastern District - ED112945

Real estate

Condo developer’s rights to build expired 
Arguments that did not cite supporting authority were deemed abandoned. The appellant’s argument cited authority for estoppel, a theory not mentioned in the appellant’s point, so the Missouri Court of Appeals deemed the point abandoned. The appellant’s condominium declarations gave appellant 10 years to create any buildings. Creation meant substantial completion, which never happened. The circuit court issued a declaratory judgment for respondent owners’ association and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment. 
CORPORATE VILLAGE OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Plaintiff-Respondent v. CORPORATE VILLAGE, LLC, Defendant-Appellant and SOUTHERN BANK, Intervenor 
Missouri Court of Appeals-Southern District – SD38649