Shultz v. Kline
| Decision Date | 31 May 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. KCD,KCD |
| Citation | 552 S.W.2d 333 |
| Parties | Stephen SHULTZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Woodrow F. KLINE, Defendant-Respondent. 28158. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Andrew C. Webb, Sedalia, for plaintiff-appellant.
Terry M. Evans, Stockard, Andereck, Hauck, Sharp & Evans, Trenton, for defendant-respondent.
Before SOMERVILLE, P. J., and WASSERSTROM and TURNAGE, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment entered by the court without a jury for $3,221.61 in favor of Woodrow Kline against Stephen Shultz on a counterclaim. Shultz appeals on the denial to grant him a jury trial. Reversed and remanded.
Shultz originally filed suit against Kline for partition of personal property consisting of a racing car and related equipment. He further requested a receiver be appointed to take charge of the car and equipment. In his second count, he requested judgment for his share of prize money Kline had already earned.
Thereafter Shultz filed an amended petition in two counts. The first count alleged Kline was indebted to him in the amount of $4,770 because Kline had sold the racing car and equipment and had failed to pay Shultz his share. The second count claimed the sum of $1,608.40 which Kline owed Shultz in prize money.
Kline filed a counterclaim after the filing of the amended petition in which he claimed he had incurred expenses in operating the racing car and Shultz had not paid his share in the amount of $3,891.14.
When this cause came on for trial, Kline and the trial court took the position the entire cause was a suit in equity because the original petition requested equitable relief of partition and the appointment of a receiver. Shultz contended the suit was converted to one strictly at law by the filing of the amended petition and the counterclaim, neither of which requested any equitable relief. Shultz insisted he was entitled to a jury trial but the court stated the matter had been set as one in equity and a jury was not available. Upon the court's refusal to grant either a continuance or a jury trial, Shultz dismissed his petition. The court thereupon took up the counterclaim as an equitable matter and proceeded to try the same.
The court, in denying Shultz a jury trial on Kline's counterclaim, relied on the well known doctrine that once equity jurisdiction attaches, full and complete adjustment of the rights of all parties will be made by equity.
The rule relied on by the court has a well established corollary stated in Krummenacher v. Western Auto Supply Co., 358 Mo. 757, 217 S.W.2d 473, 475(1) (banc 1949): ". . . a court of equity does not have jurisdiction to render a judgment for a plaintiff on legal issues in the absence of a finding that some equitable right of the plaintiff has also been violated."
In this case the court entered a pure money judgment in favor of Kline and against Shultz. No equitable relief was granted.
The court relied upon the original petition filed by Shultz in which equitable relief was requested in the first count...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Impala Platinum Ltd. v. Impala Sales (U.S.A.), Inc.
...of an action of a more traditionally legal character" than an action on a debt allegedly due under a contract.See also Shultz v. Kline, 552 S.W.2d 333 (Mo.App.1977) and Jaycox v. Brune, 434 S.W.2d 539 (Mo.1968). In Shultz, although the original petition sought only equitable relief, the cou......
-
State ex rel. Leonardi v. Sherry
...Inc. v. Unico Management Co., 615 S.W.2d 121, 125 (Mo.App.1981); Jenni v. Gamel, 602 S.W.2d 696, 701 (Mo.App.1980); Shultz v. Kline, 552 S.W.2d 333, 334 (Mo.App.1977); Owens v. Savage, 518 S.W.2d 192, 202 (Mo.App.1974); Dunning v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., 483 S.W.2d 423, 428 (Mo.App.1972); Kirt......
-
State ex rel. Willman v. Sloan
...has also been violated." Krummenacher v. Western Auto Supply Co., 358 Mo. 757, 217 S.W.2d 473, 475 (banc 1949); Shultz v. Kline, 552 S.W.2d 333, 334 (Mo.App.1977). However, this exception applies only where the only relief sought is legal, or where the equitable claims of plaintiff are dism......