Southwest By-Products, Inc. v. Stubblefield

Missouri Court of Appeals

Southwest By-Products, Inc. v. Stubblefield

564 S.W.2d 360, 1978 Mo. App. LEXIS 2061

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 27, 1978

DocketNo. 10898

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 564 S.W.2d 360 (Southwest By-Products, Inc. v. Stubblefield) 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

Southwest By-Products, Inc. v. Stubblefield, 564 S.W.2d 360, 1978 Mo. App. LEXIS 2061 (Mo. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff corporation filed a petition in two counts seeking (1) specific performance of a contract for the sale of land, and (2) damages allegedly caused by defendant’s failure to convey the land. Defendant answered. Thereafter, defendant filed a counterclaim in two counts alleging (1) that the transaction was permeated with fraudulent representations as to the value of the land, and (2) that the instant suit amounted to an abuse of process.

On April 27, 1977, the circuit court made an entry upon the docket which stated “. . . Count I and Count II are severed for purposes of trial.” The entry failed to specify whether the severance affected the two-count petition or the two-count counterclaim.

Missouri appellate courts are obliged to examine records on appeal to insure that jurisdiction exists to entertain the appeal. The pleadings in this case raise more issues than are resolved by the judgment. In Missouri, appellate review is purely statutory and § 512.020, Y.A.M.S., grants the right of appeal only where the judgment constitutes a final determination of all issues framed by the pleadings. Cochran v. DeShazo, 538 S.W.2d 598, 600(3, 4) (Mo.App.1976). However, the unsevered issues which should have been disposed of by the judgment cannot be divined. In the absence of demonstrable finality of the judgment, the court has no alternative but to dismiss the appeal as premature.

Appeal dismissed.

All concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff corporation filed a petition in two counts seeking (1) specific performance of a contract for the sale of land, and (2) damages allegedly caused by defendant’s failure to convey the land. Defendant answered. Thereafter, defendant filed a counterclaim in two counts alleging (1) that the transaction was permeated with fraudulent representations as to the value of the land, and (2) that the instant suit amounted to an abuse of process.

On April 27, 1977, the circuit court made an entry upon the docket which stated “. . . Count I and Count II are severed for purposes of trial.” The entry failed to specify whether the severance affected the two-count petition or the two-count counterclaim.

Missouri appellate courts are obliged to examine records on appeal to insure that jurisdiction exists to entertain the appeal. The pleadings in this case raise more issues than are resolved by the judgment. In Missouri, appellate review is purely statutory and § 512.020, Y.A.M.S., grants the right of appeal only where the judgment constitutes a final determination of all issues framed by the pleadings. Cochran v. DeShazo, 538 S.W.2d 598, 600(3, 4) (Mo.App.1976). However, the unsevered issues which should have been disposed of by the judgment cannot be divined. In the absence of demonstrable finality of the judgment, the court has no alternative but to dismiss the appeal as premature.

Appeal dismissed.

All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

564 S.W.2d 360, 1978 Mo. App. LEXIS 2061, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southwest-by-products-inc-v-stubblefield-moctapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack