State ex rel. JCA Architects, Inc. v. Schmidt, No. 69938

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtBLACKMAR
Citation751 S.W.2d 756
Docket NumberNo. 69938
Decision Date14 June 1988
PartiesSTATE ex rel. JCA ARCHITECTS, INC., Relator, v. The Honorable Gary SCHMIDT, Judge, Circuit Court, Moniteau County, et al., Respondents.

Page 756

751 S.W.2d 756
STATE ex rel. JCA ARCHITECTS, INC., Relator,
v.
The Honorable Gary SCHMIDT, Judge, Circuit Court, Moniteau
County, et al., Respondents.
No. 69938.
Supreme Court of Missouri,
En Banc.
June 14, 1988.

David A. Johnston, Craig A. Van Matre, Columbia, for relator.

W. Gary Drover, Camdenton, for respondents.

BLACKMAR, Judge.

The relator filed a suit to enforce an architect's lien in the Associate Division of the Circuit Court of Camden County. The petition sought recovery of $2,615.94 plus attorneys' fees, plus interest. The defendants filed a counterclaim for $11,000. The case came on for trial before The Honorable Mary Dickerson, Associate Circuit Judge, who entered judgment for the defendants on the lien claim, and also for the defendants on the counterclaim for $1000 actual and $2000 punitive damages. The court treated the case as one in which trial de novo was authorized under § 512.180, RSMo 1986, which reads as follows:

1. Any person aggrieved by a judgment in a civil case tried without a jury before an associate circuit judge, other than an associate circuit judge sitting in the probate division or who has been assigned to hear the case on the record under procedures applicable before circuit judges, shall have the right of a trial de novo in all cases where the petition claims damages not to exceed five thousand dollars.

No stenographic or electronic record of the trial was preserved.

Judgment was entered May 19, 1987. On May 29, 1987, the plaintiff filed an "application for trial de novo" in the office of the circuit clerk, but did not at the time of filing pay the filing fee of $45.00 authorized by § 483.530(8), RSMo 1986, as required by Rule 5(1) of the rules of the Circuit Court of Camden County, reading as follows:

Page 757

No clerk shall accept any petition or other original pleading unless the filing fee, as aforesaid, has been paid; provided however, this provision shall not apply in cases filed in forma pauperis in compliance with Supreme Court rule or in cases of a type for which the amount of filing fee is specified by statute or Supreme Court rule or order.

The fee was paid on June 4, 1987, which was more than ten days from the entry of the judgment giving rise to the request for trial de novo. Under date of September 8, 1987, the circuit court declared that the action would be dismissed on September 28, 1987, "absent writ from a higher court," because the filing fee was not paid before the time allowed by § 512.190.1 for filing the application for trial de novo had expired. Mandamus was sought in the Court of Appeals, Southern District, which denied the petition. The application was renewed in this Court and we...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • State ex rel. Hewitt v. Kerr, No. SC 93846
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 28, 2015
    ...a right but does not explicitly provide mandamus as a remedy to enforce the right. See State ex rel. JCA Architects, Inc. v. Schmidt, 751 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Mo. banc 1988). Additionally, this Court will not issue a remedial writ “in any case wherein adequate relief can be afforded by an appea......
  • Bey v. Precythe, WD 82602
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • November 5, 2019
    ...divisions of the circuit courts. The Missouri Supreme Court discussed Section 512.180 in State ex rel. JCA Architects, Inc. v. Schmidt , 751 S.W.2d 756 (Mo. banc 1988). In that case, the circuit court dismissed an applicant’s request for trial de novo because the filing fee was not paid bef......
  • Fuller v. Griffith, WD 83552
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • August 31, 2021
    ...in forma pauperis , to make the application [for trial de novo ] effective"); see also State ex rel. JCA Architects, Inc. v. Schmidt , 751 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Mo. 1988) (reaching same result under § 512.190.1, RSMo, which authorizes applications for trial de novo in certain actions tried befor......
  • Trice v. State, No. WD
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • July 10, 1990
    ...case is governed by Mo.Rev.Stat. § 483.530 (1986). Our state Supreme Court held in State ex rel. JCA Architects v. Schmidt, 751 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Mo. banc 1988), that while a fee is required under the statute, payment is not required at any particular time. Therefore, payment is not a jurisd......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • State ex rel. Hewitt v. Kerr, No. SC 93846
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 28, 2015
    ...a right but does not explicitly provide mandamus as a remedy to enforce the right. See State ex rel. JCA Architects, Inc. v. Schmidt, 751 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Mo. banc 1988). Additionally, this Court will not issue a remedial writ “in any case wherein adequate relief can be afforded by an appea......
  • Bey v. Precythe, WD 82602
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • November 5, 2019
    ...divisions of the circuit courts. The Missouri Supreme Court discussed Section 512.180 in State ex rel. JCA Architects, Inc. v. Schmidt , 751 S.W.2d 756 (Mo. banc 1988). In that case, the circuit court dismissed an applicant’s request for trial de novo because the filing fee was not paid bef......
  • Fuller v. Griffith, WD 83552
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • August 31, 2021
    ...in forma pauperis , to make the application [for trial de novo ] effective"); see also State ex rel. JCA Architects, Inc. v. Schmidt , 751 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Mo. 1988) (reaching same result under § 512.190.1, RSMo, which authorizes applications for trial de novo in certain actions tried befor......
  • Trice v. State, No. WD
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • July 10, 1990
    ...case is governed by Mo.Rev.Stat. § 483.530 (1986). Our state Supreme Court held in State ex rel. JCA Architects v. Schmidt, 751 S.W.2d 756, 757 (Mo. banc 1988), that while a fee is required under the statute, payment is not required at any particular time. Therefore, payment is not a jurisd......
  • 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