Bonner v. State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts

167 S.W.3d 293, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1072, 2005 WL 1692773
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedJuly 21, 2005
Docket25737
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 167 S.W.3d 293 (Bonner v. State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bonner v. State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts, 167 S.W.3d 293, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1072, 2005 WL 1692773 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment on appeal concerns action by the State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts (“Board”) against William R. Bonner, D.O. (“Dr. Bonner”). During the pendency of this case on appeal, the parties “entered into a written settlement agreement! ]” and “[a]s a term of the parties’ settlement ..., the parties have agreed that this Court should vacate the judgment of the circuit court and remand the case to the circuit court with instructions to dismiss Dr. Bonner’s petition.”

Because it appears that the parties, by settling their disputes, have mooted this appeal, we exercise our discretion to vacate the judgment and remand with instructions as requested by the parties. In doing so, we rely heavily on State ex rel. Chastain v. City of Kansas City, 968 S.W.2d 232 (Mo.App.1998), which held as follows:

“While we ... decline to declare a ‘bright line’ rule as to vacatur, we conclude that the normal practice should be to vacate the judgment when one or more parties requests such action in a case moot on appeal.... This power has been recognized in Missouri law going back to at least as early as Neenan v. City of St. Joseph, 126 Mo. 89, 28 S.W. 963, 965 (1894). This is consistent with the modern majority rule.”

Id. at 243.

Having concluded that this case is moot and does not fall within the public interest exception to the mootness doctrine, this court, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, dismisses the appeal and remands the case to the trial court with instructions to vacate its judgment and dismiss Dr. Bonner’s petition.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State Ex Rel. Nixon v. Vacation Travel, L.L.C.
241 S.W.3d 433 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)
Precision Investments, L.L.C. v. Cornerstone Propane, L.P.
231 S.W.3d 286 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
167 S.W.3d 293, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1072, 2005 WL 1692773, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonner-v-state-board-of-registration-for-the-healing-arts-moctapp-2005.