State v. Ethridge
This text of 29 S.W.3d 420 (State v. Ethridge) 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.
Opinion
C & M Bonding, Inc. (C & M) appeals from a judgment of $1,000 entered as a result of a bond forfeiture. C & M, as surety, posted a bail bond for Defendant Paul W. Ethridge after he was charged with the felony of passing a bad check.
Subsequently, Defendant failed to appear for his scheduled court date, and the State filed a “Motion for Judgement on Bond Forfeiture.” After notice to the parties, the trial court heard the State’s motion and entered the aforesaid judgment on November 4,1999.
On November 29, 1999, C & M paid the judgment in full. The record indicates the payment was voluntary and not the result of any execution or other judicial coercion. C & M’s notice of appeal was filed on December 9,1999.
The State has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal alleging that payment of the judgment prevents an appeal. The motion is well taken.
“As a general rule, when a party voluntarily pays a judgment rendered against him, he may not appeal from that judgment.” State ex rel. Highway & Transp. Comm’n v. Chadwell, 735 S.W.2d 96, 98 (Mo.App.1987).1 “When the judgment has been paid, the issue is settled and the question is moot.” Id. An appeal will be dismissed upon the occurrence of an event which renders a decision unnecessary. Id.
C & M does not dispute that the judgment was a voluntary payment. Therefore, the issue is settled and C & M raises questions which are moot.
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 S.W.3d 420, 2000 Mo. App. LEXIS 1593, 2000 WL 1591002, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-ethridge-moctapp-2000.