Joy v. Safeway Stores, Inc.
| Decision Date | 02 August 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. WD,WD |
| Citation | 755 S.W.2d 13 |
| Parties | Ruby JOY, Respondent, v. SAFEWAY STORES, INC., d/b/a Food Barn, Appellant. 40027. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Stephen S. Brown, Kansas City, for appellant.
Paul W. Kuhlman, Liberty, for respondent.
Before CLARK, P.J., and LOWENSTEIN and FENNER, JJ.
Safeway Stores, Inc., d/b/a Food Barn, hereinafter Safeway, appeals from the trial court's Order of October 29, 1987, overruling Safeway's Motion to Set Aside Interlocutory Default Judgment and to File Answer Out of Time.
On July 1, 1987, Ruby Joy, plaintiff in the underlying action and respondent herein, filed a petition against Safeway alleging damages in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000) for injuries she claimed to have received in a slip and fall accident on October 13, 1982. Process was served on the manager of Safeway in Claycomo, Missouri; the store where Ruby Joy alleged to have been injured. Safeway failed to answer the petition. Thereafter upon application of Ruby Joy, the trial court, on October 5, 1987, entered an interlocutory default judgment against Safeway on the issue of liability. The court further set a hearing on the issue of damages for October 28, 1987, and required that notice be sent to Safeway of the interlocutory default judgment and the hearing date for determination of damages. On October 15, 1987, Safeway filed with the trial court a Motion to Set Aside the Interlocutory Default Judgment and to File Answer Out of Time. Safeway's motion was taken up and evidence heard by the trial court on October 21, 1987, at which time the hearing on the issue of damages was continued to January 19, 1988, and the motion taken under advisement. On October 29, 1987, the trial court overruled Safeway's Motion to Set Aside the court's Interlocutory Default Judgment and to File Answer Out of Time with findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Safeway's request. Safeway appeals the trial court's order denying its motion.
The only issue that must be addressed, which is dispositive herein, is whether or not the trial court's order overruling Safeway's Motion to Set Aside Interlocutory Default Judgment is subject to appeal.
It is well established that finality of judgment is necessary for appellate jurisdiction and for a judgment to be final it must dispose of all parties and all issues. Leve v. Delph, 684 S.W.2d 952 (Mo.App.1985). An interlocutory judgment is one which reserves and leaves...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Long v. Long
...interlocutory and not final and appealable.” S.A. v. Jodoin, 861 S.W.2d 810, 813–14 (Mo.App.W.D.1993) (citing Joy v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 755 S.W.2d 13, 14 (Mo.App.W.D.1988) ). On the other hand, if a civil contemnor refuses to purge the contempt, the contemnor may appeal the civil contemp......
-
Simpkins v. Ryder Freight System, Inc.
...Am. Ins. Co. v. Jones, 396 S.W.2d 601, 603[1-3] (Mo. banc 1965). It must determine all of the issues in the case. Joy v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 755 S.W.2d 13, 14 (Mo.App.1988). A judgment that leaves some question or direction for future determination does not operate in praesenti, and is in......
-
James v. James
...the same aside when the 90 days passed after the filing of wife's "Motion to Vacate Order or for New Trial." See Joy v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 755 S.W.2d 13, 14 (Mo.App. 1988); Thompson v. Hodge, 348 S.W.2d 11, 13 (Mo.App. The decree of dissolution, however, was not interlocutory, and became......
-
Dunafon v. Dunafon, WD
...the same aside when the 90 days passed after the filing of wife's "Motion to Vacate Order or for New Trial." See Joy v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 755 S.W.2d 13, 14 (Mo.App.1988); Thompson v. Hodge, 348 S.W.2d 11, 13 The decree of dissolution, however, was not interlocutory, and became final on ......