Kuenz v. Walker, No. ED 89330.

CourtCourt of Appeal of Missouri (US)
Writing for the CourtGeorge W. Draper Iii
Citation244 S.W.3d 191
PartiesBernard KUENZ, Respondent, v. Daphne WALKER, Appellant.
Decision Date27 November 2007
Docket NumberNo. ED 89330.
244 S.W.3d 191
Bernard KUENZ, Respondent,
v.
Daphne WALKER, Appellant.
No. ED 89330.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.
November 27, 2007.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied January 16, 2008.

[244 S.W.3d 192]

Daphne Walker, Chesterfield, MO, for Appellant.

Michael A. Gross, Joseph F. Yeckel, Donald K. Gerard, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent.

OPINION

GEORGE W. DRAPER III, Judge.


Daphne Walker (hereinafter, "Appellant") appeals from the trial court's judgment, denying her "Amended Motion for Relief from Judgment(s) Pursuant to Rule 74.06(b)." We dismiss the appeal for failure to comply with Supreme Court Rules 84.04 and 84.13(a).1

244 S.W.3d 193

Bernard Kuenz (hereinafter, "Kuenz") filed a petition for declaratory judgment to determine the paternity of J.W., Appellant's son. Appellant cross, petitioned for a determination of paternity, child support, and necessities. After DNA testing, Kuenz was excluded as the biological father of J.W., and judgment was entered accordingly. Appellant sought an untimely appeal from the trial court's judgment which was dismissed by this Court.

Appellant then filed a nine count motion for relief from the judgment pursuant to Rule 74.06(b). A hearing was held on Appellant's motion, and it was denied. Appellant brings this appeal, pro se.

An appellant who proceeds pro se is held to the same standards as are attorneys and are not given preferential treatment. Livingston v. Schnuck Markets, hie., 184 S.W.3d 617, 618 (Mo.App. E.D.2006), Thornton v. City of Kirkwood, 161 S.W.3d 916, 919 (Mo.App. E.D.2005). Failure to comply with Supreme Court Rules constitutes grounds for dismissal. Blakey v. AAA Professional Pest Control, Inc., 219 S.W.3d 792, 794 (Mo.App. E.D. 2007). "It is not for lack of sympathy but rather it is necessitated by the requirement, of judicial impartiality, judicial economy and fairness to all parties." Thornton, 161 S.W.3d at 919.

Pro se appellants are required to comply with the Supreme Court rules, including Rule 84.04 which sets forth the, requirements for appellate briefing. Livingston, 184 S.W.3d at 618. Failure to conform with the mandates of Rule 84.04 results in unpreserved allegations of error and can constitute grounds for the dismissal of an appeal. Thummel v. King, 570 S.W.2d 679, 688 (Mo. banc 1978).

Appellant's failure to comply with Rules 84.04 and 84.13(a) leads this Court to dismiss her appeal. Appellant fails to comply with Rule 84.04 in several respects.

Rule 84.04(c) sets forth the guidelines for appellants to present a statement of facts in the brief. "The statement of facts shall be a fair and concise statement of the facts relevant to the questions presented for determination without argument." Rule 84.04(c). "The primary purpose of the statement of facts is to afford an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 practice notes
  • In the EState B. Downs v. Bugg, No. WD 73316.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • September 27, 2011
    ...of State, 313 S.W.3d 148, 152 (Mo.App. W.D.2010). Pro se claimants are held to the same standards as attorneys. Kuenz v. Walker, 244 S.W.3d 191, 193 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). “ ‘It is not for lack of sympathy but rather it is necessitated by the requirement of judicial impartiality, judicial econ......
  • In re Marriage of Smith, No. ED 90998.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • March 24, 2009
    ...allegations of error not properly briefed "shall not be considered in any civil appeal." See Fritz, 243 S.W.3d at 489; Kuenz v. Walker, 244 S.W.3d 191, 194 (Mo.App.2007). In this case, not one point on appeal complies with Rule 84.04(d)(1) or is followed by an argument that demonstrates how......
  • Meyer v. City of St. Peters, No. ED 94882.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • April 19, 2011
    ...of Rule 84.04 results in unpreserved allegations of error and can constitute grounds for the dismissal of an appeal. Kuenz v. Walker, 244 S.W.3d 191, 193 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). 2. All statutory references are to RSMo (2000) unless otherwise...
  • Bolt v. Giordano, No. ED 93121.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • April 20, 2010
    ...280 S.W.3d 787, 788 (Mo.App. E.D.2009). Failure to comply with Supreme Court Rules constitutes grounds for dismissal. Kuenz v. Walker, 244 S.W.3d 191, 193 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). "It is not for lack of sympathy but rather it is necessitated by the requirement of judicial impartiality, judicial ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
  • In the EState B. Downs v. Bugg, No. WD 73316.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • September 27, 2011
    ...of State, 313 S.W.3d 148, 152 (Mo.App. W.D.2010). Pro se claimants are held to the same standards as attorneys. Kuenz v. Walker, 244 S.W.3d 191, 193 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). “ ‘It is not for lack of sympathy but rather it is necessitated by the requirement of judicial impartiality, judicial econ......
  • In re Marriage of Smith, No. ED 90998.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • March 24, 2009
    ...allegations of error not properly briefed "shall not be considered in any civil appeal." See Fritz, 243 S.W.3d at 489; Kuenz v. Walker, 244 S.W.3d 191, 194 (Mo.App.2007). In this case, not one point on appeal complies with Rule 84.04(d)(1) or is followed by an argument that demonstrates how......
  • Meyer v. City of St. Peters, No. ED 94882.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • April 19, 2011
    ...of Rule 84.04 results in unpreserved allegations of error and can constitute grounds for the dismissal of an appeal. Kuenz v. Walker, 244 S.W.3d 191, 193 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). 2. All statutory references are to RSMo (2000) unless otherwise...
  • Bolt v. Giordano, No. ED 93121.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • April 20, 2010
    ...280 S.W.3d 787, 788 (Mo.App. E.D.2009). Failure to comply with Supreme Court Rules constitutes grounds for dismissal. Kuenz v. Walker, 244 S.W.3d 191, 193 (Mo.App. E.D.2007). "It is not for lack of sympathy but rather it is necessitated by the requirement of judicial impartiality, judicial ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT