Dowlin v. Western Cas. and Sur. Co., KCD
| Decision Date | 03 December 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. KCD,KCD |
| Citation | 592 S.W.2d 486 |
| Parties | William DOWLIN, d/b/a Dowlin Enterprises, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. The WESTERN CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. 30109. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Hamp Ford, Jeffrey O. Parshall, Columbia, for defendant-appellant.
Rex V. Gump, Moberly, for plaintiff-respondent.
Before SHANGLER, P. J., and SWOFFORD and CLARK, JJ.
Plaintiff Dowlin commenced action against defendant insurer Western Casualty when, after loss by fire to Dowlin's business premises, Western denied payment of Dowlin's claim for the face amount of his policy. The cause was tried to the court on a stipulation of facts supplemented by evidence adduced by plaintiff. Western appeals from the judgment awarding Dowlin $10,000.00, the full indemnification under the insurance contract.
Western's brief states three points relied on to demonstrate error in the rulings of the trial court presented for appellate review. In each, Western asserts that a particular finding made by the court was error, but in none is any suggestion offered as to wherein and why the rulings so made are claimed to be erroneous. In this respect, the brief violates a fundamental requirement of Rule 84.04(d). Merely stating the alleged error without also specifying why it is contended that the court's action was erroneous neither satisfies the mandate of the rule nor preserves anything for review. Snow v. Fikes, 570 S.W.2d 815 (Mo.App.1978).
In abstract manner, Western claims it was error for the trial court to have found (1) that Dowlin suffered loss of stock and movable personal property in the amount of $6,928.13, (2) that loss of improvements and betterments were covered under Western's policy and (3) that Dowlin lost improvements to the value of $6,744.91. Such a recitation of "points" offers little more than a complaint by a losing litigant that he failed to prevail. No suggestion or intimation is offered as to why it was error for the trial court to find that Dowlin's losses in the respective items of property were in the amounts stated nor is any indication given of the provisions in Western's policy which purport to exclude, or do not extend coverage to, the improvements and betterments.
Appellate courts are not obliged to seek out through examination of briefs to ascertain the intended meaning of points relied on as assertion of trial court error but are in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Willard v. Doyle, 11816
...the original divorce decree but nowhere does it attempt to enlighten as to why such failure was error. Dowlin v. Western Cas. & Sur. Co., 592 S.W.2d 486, 487(2) (Mo.App.1979); Snow v. Fikes, 570 S.W.2d 815, 816(2) (Mo.App.1978). Claiming, as done in point III, that we should make our own fi......
-
Dycus v. Dycus, 16858
...It is within the constraints of the points presented by appellant's trial brief that this case is reviewed. Dowlin v. Western Cas. & Sur. Co., 592 S.W.2d 486, 488 (Mo.App.1979). Any issue presented and decided by the trial court, other than those identified by appellant's points relied on i......
-
Maxbar Realty Corp. v. The Great Atlantic and Pac. Tea Co., Inc., 43937
...for review as it does not state what actions or rulings of the court are sought to be reviewed. Rule 84.04(d), Dowlin v. Western Cas. & Sur. Co., 592 S.W.2d 486, 488 (Mo.App.1979). Point II The Court erred in finding that Respondent had no rental liability to Appellants for rent owed for th......