Case summaries for Oct. 23-29, 2026

Administrative | Appellate | Criminal | Family | Insurance | Local government | Personal Injury | Post-Conviction | Real Estate | Utilities

Administrative

Matters not raised before agency waived on appeal
Administrative agencies had no authority to declare statutes unconstitutional, so parties did not have to challenge the constitutionality of a statute in actions before administrative agencies. But otherwise, parties waived any matter not raised before the agency, including the unconstitutional application of a statute. In an earlier appeal, the Missouri Court of Appeals reversed a decision of the State Tax Commission and remanded the action. On remand, the commission’s hearing officer took official notice of the record in the earlier hearing. That official notice did not constitute the assertion of an argument based on that record, and the appellant did not otherwise raise that argument to the commission, and a petition for judicial review in circuit court did not change that result, so that argument was not preserved for appeal. The Court of Appeals also ordered the commission to appraise the real property of an investor-owned utility under the reproduction cost approach. The Court of Appeals described that approach as focusing on the original cost of improvements with depreciation. The commission did not err in applying that approach on remand as the Court of Appeals described it. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment that affirmed the commission’s decision.
(Overview summary)
Tracy Baldwin, Assessor, Clay County, Missouri v. Spire Missouri Inc. F/K/A Laclede Gas Company
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD88614 (Consolidated with WD88615)

Agencies could find facts related to violations of law
A municipal judge was necessary to convict someone of violating ordinances, but not to find facts constituting such violations. Persons could include legal entities. City ordinances governed the issuance of business licenses, allowed denial for prospective or actual violations of ordinances “applicable” to the business, and barred amusement devices that offered monetary prizes. That described — and was therefore applicable to — coin-operated machines issuing tickets redeemable for cash, and the applicant’s business of placing those machines on other business premises. Issuance included renewal. Other grounds were additional and not limiting. Agencies could not invalidate ordinances so the appellants could preserve constitutional challenges without raising them before an agency. But the ordinances expressly applied to devices not covered by statutes so the statutes did not pre-empt the ordinances. The city denied the application and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that decision.
(Overview summary)
Torch Electronics, LLC v. City of Springfield
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD88364

Appellate

Events mooted issues pending appeal
Appellate courts had no jurisdiction over matters that became moot, meaning that no dispute remained on which to grant effective relief. The circuit court exercised its authority to remove a juvenile from the parents’ home. The parents appealed based on the weight of the evidence. Pending that appeal, the circuit court released the juvenile and returned the juvenile to the parents’ home. That event eliminated the parties’ dispute. The weight of the evidence in their case was not a matter of general interest. The Missouri Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal.
(Overview summary)
In the Interest of: J.L.W., Juvenile; Juvenile Officer v. C.W., Natural Father, and T.W., Natural Mother
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD88713

Appellant’s briefing deficiencies required dismissal
Rules of appellate procedure preserved the courts’ impartiality by barring speculation on the appellants’ challenges. Those rules required the appellants to construct points relied on in a prescribed fashion that included only one ruling challenged, and multifarious points preserved nothing. The appellants had to include references in the table of cases to pages in the brief where the appellant cited those cases; and page references to the record on appeal in the statement of facts and argument sections. After notice and an opportunity to correct, the Missouri Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal.
(Overview summary)
Liberty Landing Cooperative v. Jeremy Warren
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD88605

Criminal

Disposition of detainers deadline waived
The Interstate Agreement on Detainers required disposition of detainers within a specified time, but “willingly accepting treatment inconsistent with the [Agreement]’s time limits” waived those limits. That included the defendant’s motion for a continuance of the trial beyond the agreement’s time limits. No plain error occurred when the circuit court admitted evidence obtained during an inventory search of a car before towing, even though the towing never occurred. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Raymond L. Hardge, Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District - ED113878

No plain error in sentence enhancements
The elements of stalking in the first degree included a “course of conduct,” meaning incidents linked by a continuing purpose. “[A] distinct separation of both time and space” between the defendant’s threats showed that each threat was a separate incident. The elements of chronic DWI offender status included earlier convictions for offenses involving “driving.” Detailed allegations on a uniform traffic citation showed that the allegations included driving. The defendant had the right to a jury determination of the facts enhancing his sentences, but could not show that a jury would have reached a different conclusion, and so showed no miscarriage of justice for plain error review. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions.
(Overview summary)
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. Nicholas Rinehart, Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District - ED113260

Acquittal reversed
The defendants presumptively intended the “natural and probable consequences” of their conduct. The elements of attempted first-degree burglary included an intent to enter an inhabited building. The elements of first-degree assault included an attempt to cause serious physical injury. In support of those elements, the State showed that the defendant kicked and banged on the victim’s front door, had to be escorted off the victim’s property at gunpoint, repeated that conduct while carrying a knife, tried to wrest the victim’s gun away, pulled the victim out of his house, and again had to be escorted off the victim’s property at gunpoint. Juries determined credibility and found facts. The jury found the defendant guilty, but the defendant moved for acquittal notwithstanding the verdict, and the circuit court granted that motion. The Missouri Court of Appeals reversed the judgment, remanded the action, and ordered the circuit court to accept the jury’s verdict.
STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Appellant v. PAUL JOHNSON, Defendant-Respondent
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District - SD39308

No right to re-appointed counsel
Reasonable suspicion of criminal activity supported detentions and searches for weapons. Police received contemporaneous reports of road rage with shots fired, so a search of the defendant’s vehicle was lawful and the pistol found in a locked compartment was admissible. No plain error occurred when the circuit court entered the pistol into the record. Judges were presumed impartial and had to recuse themselves when their impartiality was reasonably in question. The defendant’s attempts at judicial tampering did not, alone, require recusal. As to denial of recusal, the Missouri Court of Appeals declined plain error review. After waiving counsel, the defendant asked for another appointment of counsel but did not supply financial information necessary to determine indigency. As to denying re-appointed counsel, the Court of Appeals declined plain error review. The elements of unlawful possession of a firearm did not include discharging a firearm so evidence of such discharge caused no prejudice. And cumulative evidence could not prejudice the defendant. As to the entry of that evidence into the record, the Court of Appeals declined plain error review. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.
STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent v. ADEN XAVIER WARR HARPER, Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District - SD38806

Time served applied to concurrent sentences
The appellant’s point relied on was defective but did not hinder appellate review. Judgment on the pleadings was due any defendant when the plaintiff’s allegations, assumed true, showed no right to relief. Vacatur of a sentence rendered that sentence void ab initio, so time served on that offense had to be credited against another sentence. On four counts, the appellant was serving four sentences consecutively. The appellant received a vacatur on one count with a finding of guilt on a lesser-included offense on that count, and re-sentencing to four concurrent terms of confinement. Therefore, credit for time served applied to all the concurrent sentences. The circuit court held otherwise, so the Missouri Court of Appeals reversed the judgment and ordered credit for time served accordingly.
(Overview summary)
Deandre L. Pointer v. Missouri Department of Corrections
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD88732

Family

Property division reversed
The statement of facts in the appellants’ briefs had to recite all evidence needed to resolve its point relied on, but the appellant omitted probative evidence supporting the circuit court’s ruling. In actions for dissolution of marriage where child custody was at issue, circuit courts could appoint a guardian ad litem to investigate and advocate for children, “functioning as an agent or arm of the court, to which it owes its principal duty of allegiance, and not strictly as legal counsel to a child client”. The GAL’s ex parte mention of a conflict between the GAL and a party’s attorney did not prejudice the appellant. The circuit court’s order for the GAL to transmit the children’s wishes directly to the circuit court ex parte was not error. The circuit court could factor in the children’s wishes without testimony or an in-camera interview. The tax exemption for a dependent child followed custody of the child. The property division required re-financing of the marital home and equity payments, which necessitated early withdrawal of assets and costs, but the record did not show the amounts of those costs and penalties. Therefore, the record did not support the property division. The Missouri Court of Appeals reversed and vacated the judgment as to the tax exemption and the equity payments, and otherwise affirmed the judgment.
In Re the Marriage of ELIJAH DYLAN PRYOR, Petitioner-Respondent v. CORTNI SUE PRYOR, Respondent-Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District - SD38545

Insurance

Stacking step-down was okay
“[I]t is generally the policy of Missouri that when an insurance company collects premiums from an insured, the insured should receive the coverage for which he or she paid those premiums.” The Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law set minimum benefits that insureds had to carry and insurers had to provide. Regulations also expressed public policy. Regulations governing uninsured motor vehicle policies barred any reduction in benefits for workers’ compensation awards, even if the reduced amount met the minimum. And uninsured motor vehicle benefits were subject to stacking. Those public policies negated the insurer’s unambiguously contrary provisions in a first policy. As to a second policy, benefits stacked onto the first policy were subject to a step-down under a policy exemption that limited such benefits to the minimum. The Missouri Court of Appeals ordered payment of the first policy at the policy limits and payment on the second policy at the minimum.
(Overview summary)
Zachary Beaver, et al., Appellants, v. American Family Insurance Company, S.I., Respondent
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District - ED114224

Local Government

Ordinances were not in evidence
Ordinances were not subject to judicial notice, so parties seeking a ruling related to such ordinances had to enter them into the record. Hard copies had to be certified. In an action for pre-enforcement declaratory and injunctive relief, the appellant plaintiff sought a ruling that a city’s ordinances conflicted with State statutes. Pre-enforcement review’s elements included a ripe controversy. But the plaintiff offered only uncertified copies, so the circuit court did not err in excluding them. Without the language of the ordinances in the record, the plaintiff could not show that the city was threatening the plaintiff’s due process rights by enforcing the ordinances, and could not show any conflict with related statutes. The circuit court denied relief and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment.
(Overview summary)
Private Party Impound, LLC v. City of Kansas City, Missouri
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD88607

Personal Injury

No support for comparative fault instruction
Any instruction had to have support in substantial evidence so, in an action for negligence, evidence of plaintiff’s fault was necessary to support a comparative fault instruction. The defendant’s theory was that the plaintiff failed to keep a careful lookout. But a careful lookout did not mean anticipating the defendant’s attempt to cross three lanes ahead of the plaintiff. The jury’s calculation of total damages was correct, so the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment except the assignment of fault to the plaintiff, and entered judgment for the plaintiff in the full amount of damages.
(Overview summary)
Angie Long, Appellant, v. Louise F. Saltzman, Respondent.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District - ED114254

Premises liability instructions were okay
Instructions had to have support in the record. The doctrine of implied primary assumption of the risk negated any defendant landowner duty to an injured plaintiff who knowingly and voluntarily engaged in an activity of known and inherent risk unless the landowner increased that risk. “Missouri law is replete with cases imposing a duty of care not to enhance exposure to the inherent risk of equine activity through acts or omissions of negligence.” That described the defendant’s repeated refusals to restrain dogs while the plaintiff was saddling a horse, so the circuit court did not err in submitting the case on comparative fault. Evidence supported the instructions’ characterization of the plaintiff as an invitee because the plaintiff’s presence on the defendant’s premises benefited the defendant. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment.
ARLENE MALDONADO, Plaintiff/Respondent v. JAMES "MICHAEL" COTTER, CHERIE COTTER, Defendants/Appellants
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District - SD38663

Post-Conviction

Appellate counsel was not ineffective
“[I]t is the function of the parties to call witnesses as part of our adversary process [,]” and due process did not require the circuit court to sua sponte procure witnesses or continue the hearing. In the criminal action, an isolated mention of the movant’s active warrants, without reference to any specific offenses, the circuit court sustained the trial counsel’s objection, and issued a curative instruction, making a mistrial unnecessary; the appellate counsel was not ineffective for arguing the need for a mistrial on appeal. The circuit court could, and did, dispose of related claims in the motion together so its judgment was final and subject to appeal. The circuit court denied relief and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment.
(Overview summary)
Devon Coleman, Appellant, v. State of Missouri, Respondent
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District - ED114009

Sentencing structure was lawful, no need to clarify
The elements of a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel included prejudice to the movant resulting from deficient performance of counsel. Counsel had no duty to make meritless objections. Statutes governing the movant’s offenses determined whether sentences were concurrent or consecutive, specifically including consecutive sentences for multiple counts of specified offenses, which “ensures independent punishment for every enumerated offense and for every non-enumerated offense committed during or at the same time as any enumerated offense.” The circuit court imposed each sentence on each count accordingly, so the plea counsel’s performance was not deficient and no prejudice resulted, and a double jeopardy objection would have been meritless. The circuit court denied relief and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment.
(Overview summary)
Johnathon Lee Gilman v. State of Missouri
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD88298

Time of day was not material to alibi.
The elements of claims for ineffective assistance of counsel included prejudice from deficient performance. Trial counsel’s performance was deficient, the movant charged, because trial counsel did not move to dismiss the underlying criminal action for delays in bringing it. But, in criminal actions, dismissal for pre-indictment delay required the defendants to show that the State delayed the procedure for a tactical advantage. The movant offered no such evidence so the movant showed no prejudice from trial counsel’s choice. The date and time on verdict directors had to match the date and time of alibi instructions. The time was not important to the movant’s alibi, and was absent from the verdict directors, so trial counsel agreed to remove the time from the alibi instruction. Those facts did not show deficient performance, and it was not reasonably likely that including the time would have made any difference. Post-conviction relief was also available to remedy deprivations of due process, like non-disclosure of a plea deal with a witness, but the movant did not show that such a plea deal existed. The circuit court denied relief and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment.
MARLO HODGES, Appellant v. STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District - SD39230

Real Estate

The Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act pre-empted State action
Judgment on the pleadings was due defendant when the plaintiff’s petition showed no grounds for recovery. The Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act pre-empted State remedies that determined ownership of a railroad’s real property in favor of the United States Surface Transportation Board. That provision barred the plaintiff appellant’s petition to quiet title and for adverse possession. Pre-act dicta did not change that result. The circuit court granted judgment on the pleadings for the defendant railroad and the Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment.
(Overview summary)
Tazl Development, LLC, Appellant, v. BNSF Railway Company, Respondent.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District - ED114292

Utilities

Points estopped
The appellants could not raise new arguments on appeal in a reply brief, so the Missouri Court of Appeals granted the respondent’s motion to strike from the appellant’s reply brief all arguments not raised in the appellant’s brief. Final decisions of the Public Service Commission were conclusive as to any collateral action. In an earlier commission action, the appellant had the opportunity to intervene in litigation over the respondent’s construction of an electrical transmission line. The commission issued a certificate of convenience and necessity governing that construction. In a later action, the appellant brought a consumer complaint addressing the construction. The commission denied relief and the appellant appealed that later decision. In that appeal of the later decision, the earlier decision collaterally estopped all but one of the appellant’s points relied on. The remaining point challenged only the credibility assessments of the commission, to which appellate courts granted deference, so the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision.
(Overview summary)
Cheri Meadows v. Grain Belt Express, LLC, et al.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District - WD88591