Patricia Breckenridge

In this premises liability case, Bob Ratcliff sued Sprint Missouri after allegedly injuring his ankle by stepping into an uncovered 24-by-24-inch opening in a sub-floor of the Truman Building, which a Sprint technician had created while installing phone lines. Ratcliff claimed Sprint negligently failed to barricade, attend, or warn about the hazard, but Sprint countered that the opening was open and obvious, properly attended, and that Ratcliff failed to keep a careful lookout, also presenting evidence of a prior ankle injury and factitious disorder. After a three-week trial, the jury found Sprint zero percent at fault and Ratcliff 100 percent at fault, resulting in judgment for Sprint. On appeal, Ratcliff challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, evidentiary rulings, denial of amendments, and refusal of a protective order to record a medical exam; the court affirmed, holding that the evidence supported the verdict, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary matters, and other claims lacked merit.

torts & liabilityprocedure

In State v. Roberson, the defendant was convicted after a bench trial of misdemeanor third-degree domestic assault against his wife. On appeal, Roberson challenged the constitutionality of the statute allowing bench trials for misdemeanors unless a jury is demanded and argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction. The court held that the constitutional issue was not preserved for review because it was not raised before the trial court and the defendant proceeded without objection to the bench trial. The court also determined that the victim's testimony and supporting evidence from deputies provided substantial evidence for the guilty verdict. The trial court's judgment was therefore affirmed.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned whether Countrywide, as mortgagee under a deed of trust with a union mortgage clause in an Allstate fire insurance policy, could recover proceeds for fire damage that occurred before it foreclosed on the property and purchased it for the full amount of the debt. The trial court ruled for Countrywide based on an independent contract theory from prior precedent, but the appellate court reversed, holding that Countrywide had no remaining insurable interest once the foreclosure satisfied the debt. The core reasoning was that the mortgagee's rights to pre-foreclosure insurance proceeds are limited to the outstanding debt; full satisfaction at foreclosure extinguishes any claim under the policy, regardless of the union clause language protecting against changes in ownership or foreclosure. The court distinguished cases where loss occurred after foreclosure and found that the clause's protection extended only up to the secured amount, not creating a windfall for the new owner.

property

This case involved UMB Bank challenging the City of Kansas City's disallowance of interest expense deductions on its earnings tax returns for 1995-1997, which the City claimed were tied to nontaxable government securities investments and thus not deductible. After UMB paid additional taxes under protest and sued for a refund, the trial court ruled in UMB's favor on remand, finding the expenses were necessary operating costs under the city's tax ordinance. On appeal, the court reversed the judgment, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding relevant expert testimony from the City's audit manager on whether such interest expenses qualify as deductible necessary expenses of operation. The appellate court reasoned that the testimony was directly material to the central factual dispute, the witness was qualified, and its exclusion prevented the City from presenting its core position at trial. The case was remanded for a new trial limited to that issue.

taxesbusiness & regulatory

In this case, defendants in a medical malpractice lawsuit (relators) petitioned for a writ of prohibition after the trial court vacated its earlier order transferring venue from Jackson County to Livingston County. The Missouri Court of Appeals made the writ absolute, ruling that the trial court lacked authority to vacate the transfer order. The court reasoned that the plaintiffs' opposition to the venue transfer motion was filed one day late under Rule 51.045, making the original transfer order valid, and that under Rule 51.13 a court cannot annul a venue transfer without all parties' consent, which was not obtained here.

proceduretorts & liability

This case involved the dissolution of a long marriage between Sarah and Joseph Dowell, who had accumulated substantial marital assets through a family farming operation and grass seed business known as J & J Seed. Sarah appealed the trial court's division of property, equal apportionment of significant income tax liabilities between the parties, and denial of her request for maintenance. The trial court had awarded each spouse roughly comparable net property values after a cash equalization payment, split the tax debt, and declined maintenance based on the assets and income available post-division. The appellate court affirmed the judgment in part but reversed and remanded in part.

family lawpropertytaxes