Cornelius v. Tubbesing, 11084
| Decision Date | 22 January 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 11084,11084 |
| Parties | Samuel M. CORNELIUS and Mary M. Cornelius, his wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Lee R. TUBBESING and Eileen Tubbesing, his wife, Defendants-Respondents. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Ronald K. Carpenter, Phillips, McElyea, Walker & Carpenter, P. C., Camdenton, for plaintiffs-appellants.
John R. Casteel, Foster, Casteel & Drover, Camdenton, for defendants-respondents.
Appeal from purported judgment denying injunction and damages for trespass for the alleged encroachment of a patio onto plaintiffs' land. The trial court made the following entry on June 9, 1978:
"
In Missouri, appellate review is created and governed by statute and § 512.020, V.A.M.S., requires that appellate review of such matters must be preceded by rendition and entry of a final judgment. The instant docket entry constitutes nothing more than a finding that one of the parties is entitled to judgment. Cochran v. DeShazo, 538 S.W.2d 598 (Mo.App.1976). Furthermore, the docket entry is not final as to all the parties to the action as it refers to the parties in the singular despite the fact that there were two plaintiffs and two defendants. Wile v. Donovan, 514 S.W.2d 177 (Mo.App.1974).
The appeal is dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Byrd v. Brown
...on May 22, 1981. In support of this argument, defendants cite Elmore v. Whorton, 581 S.W.2d 950 (Mo.App.1979); Cornelius v. Tubbesing, 576 S.W.2d 753 (Mo.App.1979); Gray v. Bryant, 557 S.W.2d 489 (Mo.App.1977); Corley v. McGaugh, 555 S.W.2d 376 (Mo.App.1977); Riverside Chemical Co. v. Hawki......
-
Cornelius v. Tubbesing, 11290
...the trial court's judgment is affirmed. All concur. 1 An earlier appeal was dismissed because final judgment had not been entered. 576 S.W.2d 753 (Mo.App.1979). ...