Stormer v. Richfield Hospitality Serv., ED78905
| Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 60 S.W.3d 10 |
| Docket Number | ED78905 |
| Decision Date | 25 September 2001 |
| Parties | Marjorie Stormer, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., Defendant/Appellant. ED78905 Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District 0 |
Marjorie Stormer, Plaintiff/Respondent,
v.
Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., Defendant/Appellant.
ED78905
Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
09/25/2001
Appeal From: Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Hon. Steven R. Ohmer
Counsel for Appellant: Debbie S. Champion and Kevin J. Marquitz
Counsel for Respondent: Ted F. Frapolli
Opinion Summary:
Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., an innkeeper, appeals the summary judgment for $9,750 entered in favor of its guest, Marjorie Stormer, in her action asserting negligence and breach of contract.
Division Three holds: As the claimant, it was Stormer's burden to establish that Richfield could not prove the facts necessary to invoke its affirmative defenses based on sections 419.020 and 419.010, RSMo 1994. The materials Stormer submitted in support of her claim were insufficient to negate any element of the affirmative defenses asserted by Richfield.
Gaertner, Sr., P.J., and Draper III, J., concur.
Lawrence G. Crahan, Judge
Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc. ("Innkeeper") appeals the summary judgment for $9,750 entered in favor of Marjorie Stormer ("Guest") in her action asserting negligence and breach of contract. We reverse and remand.
The basic facts of the case are essentially undisputed. On Friday, May 14, 1999, Guest and her daughter ("Daughter") arrived by automobile at the entrance to the Regal Riverfront Hotel in St. Louis, Missouri. The hotel is operated by Innkeeper. The hotel doorman greeted Guest and Daughter, explained to Daughter where to park the car, placed their luggage on a cart and told Daughter he would escort Guest and the bags to the hotel lobby. Upon entering the lobby, the luggage cart was placed near an ATM machine. The doorman told Guest, "One of these gentlemen will take care of you from here" and he left. Guest proceeded to the front desk to check in. Guest could not see the luggage while she was checking in because it was behind her, but she did see it sitting on the cart after she checked in.
As Guest was checking in, she was informed that their room was not ready but would be ready in fifteen or twenty minutes. At some point shortly thereafter, Daughter rejoined Guest. They asked directions for the restroom and went there. When they returned the bags were still there. Guest and Daughter then walked down to the end of the lobby to look around. When they returned they stopped at the front desk and were informed their room was ready. They...
To continue reading
Request your trial
11 practice notes
-
Ethridge v. Tierone Bank, No. 27016 (MO 5/11/2006), No. 27016.
...trial court should have employed in initially deciding whether to grant Mary's motion. Stormer v. Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., 60 S.W.3d 10, 12 (Mo. App. 2001). We view the record in the light most favorable to the party against whom judgment was entered, and we accord that party t......
-
Haulers Ins. Co., Inc. v. Pounds, No. SD 29068.
...grant the motion. Barekman v. City of Republic, 232 S.W.3d 675, 677 (Mo.App. S.D.2007) (citing Stormer v. Richfield Hosp. Services., Inc., 60 S.W.3d 10, 12 (Mo.App. E.D.2001)). We view the record in the light most favorable to the party against whom judgment was entered—according that party......
-
Barekman v. City of Republic, No. 27939.
...court should have employed in initially deciding whether to grant the City's motion. Stormer v. Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., 60 S.W.3d 10, 12 (Mo.App.2001). We view the record in the light most favorable to the party against whom judgment was entered, and we accord that party the b......
-
Hearod v. Baggs, No. 26703.
...trial court should have employed in initially deciding whether to grant summary judgment. Stormer v. Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., 60 S.W.3d 10, 12 (Mo.App.2001). "The propriety of summary judgment is purely an issue of law." ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine ......
Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
-
Ethridge v. Tierone Bank, No. 27016 (MO 5/11/2006), No. 27016.
...trial court should have employed in initially deciding whether to grant Mary's motion. Stormer v. Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., 60 S.W.3d 10, 12 (Mo. App. 2001). We view the record in the light most favorable to the party against whom judgment was entered, and we accord that party t......
-
Haulers Ins. Co., Inc. v. Pounds, No. SD 29068.
...grant the motion. Barekman v. City of Republic, 232 S.W.3d 675, 677 (Mo.App. S.D.2007) (citing Stormer v. Richfield Hosp. Services., Inc., 60 S.W.3d 10, 12 (Mo.App. E.D.2001)). We view the record in the light most favorable to the party against whom judgment was entered—according that party......
-
Barekman v. City of Republic, No. 27939.
...court should have employed in initially deciding whether to grant the City's motion. Stormer v. Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., 60 S.W.3d 10, 12 (Mo.App.2001). We view the record in the light most favorable to the party against whom judgment was entered, and we accord that party the b......
-
Hearod v. Baggs, No. 26703.
...trial court should have employed in initially deciding whether to grant summary judgment. Stormer v. Richfield Hospitality Services, Inc., 60 S.W.3d 10, 12 (Mo.App.2001). "The propriety of summary judgment is purely an issue of law." ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-Am. Marine ......
Request a trial to view additional results