Feldmann v. McNeill, 56040
| Decision Date | 27 June 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 56040,56040 |
| Citation | Feldmann v. McNeill, 772 S.W.2d 409 (Mo. App. 1989) |
| Parties | Gary L. FELDMANN, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Paul S. McNEILL, Jr., Director of Revenue, Respondent-Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Mary Browning, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent-appellant.
Frederick H. Schwetye, Union, Melvin G. Franke, Villa Ridge, for petitioner-respondent.
Appellant (Director) appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting a petition for review by respondent (Driver) and enjoining Director from revoking driver's operating license. We reverse.
On March 31, 1988, Director mailed a notice to Driver that his driving privileges in Missouri would be revoked for a period of one year beginning May 13, 1988, for failure to take a chemical test. Driver filed his petition for review on July 28, 1988, 116 days after notice is presumed to have been received by Driver. See Section 302.515.2, RSMo (1986). On November 21, 1988, an Assistant Prosecuting Attorney confessed judgment on behalf of Director and the trial court entered judgment for Driver and enjoined Director from revoking Driver's operating license.
This issue has been decided repeatedly by our courts. The trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Driver failed to file his petition for review within the thirty-day time limit proscribed by Section 302.311, RSMo (1986). See Palazzolo v. Director of Revenue, 760 S.W.2d 190, 191 (Mo.App.1988). The fact that the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Jaycox v. Director of Revenue, 19154
...859 S.W.2d 230, 231 (Mo.App.1993). See also Romans v. Director of Revenue, 783 S.W.2d 894, 896 (Mo. banc 1990); Feldmann v. McNeill, 772 S.W.2d 409, 410 (Mo.App.1989); McGee v. Director of Revenue, 767 S.W.2d 630, 631 (Mo.App.1989). Evans and Welch cite the pertinent The judgment is reverse......
-
Bauer v. Director of Revenue, 64836
...confession of judgment does not vest the court with subject matter jurisdiction which is otherwise lacking. Feldmann v. McNeill, 772 S.W.2d 409, 410 (Mo.App.1989). We reverse the decision of the trial court and remand with directions to the trial court to dismiss Driver's CRANDALL, P.J., an......
-
Benbrook v. Director of Revenue, 64853
...the circuit court with subject matter jurisdiction. Pool v. Director of Revenue, 824 S.W.2d 515, 517 (Mo.App.1992); Feldmann v. McNeill, 772 S.W.2d 409, 410 (Mo.App.1989). Therefore, the court's rescission of the revocation of Driver's license is null and void. The only proper action is dis......
-
Gunn v. Director of Revenue, 65059
...judgment in this case is, therefore, irrelevant. 1 Evans v. Director of Revenue, 871 S.W.2d 90, 92 (Mo.App.E.D.1994); Feldmann v. McNeill, 772 S.W.2d 409, 410 (Mo.App.1989). Subject matter jurisdiction may not be agreed to or waived, and any action taken by a court lacking subject matter ju......
-
Chapter 6 Labor, Motor Vehicles, Alcoholic Beverages, Public Safety, Occupations
...Revenue, 804 S.W.2d 749 | | (Mo. banc 1991); Kimball v. Dir. of Revenue, 785 S.W.2d 326 (Mo. App. W.D. 1990); Feldman v. McNeill- | | , 772 S.W.2d 409 (Mo. App. E.D. 1989). Applies to request for hearing by driver whose license was re- | voked for refusing to submit to breathalyzer, per § 5......