Salter v. Eagan

Missouri Court of Appeals

Salter v. Eagan

330 S.W.3d 606, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 96, 2011 WL 291338

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 1, 2011·No. WD 71916·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order

PER CURIAM:

Louis Eagan, d/b/a Eagan’s Quality Furniture, Inc., and Katelin’s Fine Furnishings, appeals from a dismissal of his untimely filed application for trial de novo before the Circuit Court of Ray County. Because the deadline for filing an application for trial de novo from an adverse *607 small claims ruling is absolute, the Ray County Circuit Court did not err in dismissing Eagan’s untimely application, and we affirm in this per curiam order. We have provided the parties a legal memorandum explaining our ruling today. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Order

PER CURIAM:

Louis Eagan, d/b/a Eagan’s Quality Furniture, Inc., and Katelin’s Fine Furnishings, appeals from a dismissal of his untimely filed application for trial de novo before the Circuit Court of Ray County. Because the deadline for filing an application for trial de novo from an adverse *607 small claims ruling is absolute, the Ray County Circuit Court did not err in dismissing Eagan’s untimely application, and we affirm in this per curiam order. We have provided the parties a legal memorandum explaining our ruling today. Rule 84.16(b).

Salter v. Eagan, 330 S.W.3d 606, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 96, 2011 WL 291338 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

330 S.W.3d 606 (Salter v. Eagan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related