Sutton v. Sutton
| Citation | 567 S.W.2d 147 |
| Decision Date | 23 May 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 38831,38831 |
| Parties | Emery SUTTON, Appellant, v. Harold SUTTON, Respondent. . Louis District,Division Three |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
Lawrence N. Koeln, Centerville, for appellant.
Jack C. Harper, Clayton, for respondent.
Plaintiff Emery Sutton brought this suit against the defendant Harold Sutton to recover actual and punitive damages for defendant's alleged alienation of the affections of the plaintiff's wife. The Circuit Court of St. Charles County, Missouri, granted defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Plaintiff appeals. We reverse and remand for trial.
In considering a petition on motion to dismiss, we accept as true the facts properly pleaded and construe it liberally and favorably to the plaintiff, giving him the benefit of all reasonable inferences fairly deducible from the facts stated. Concerned Parents v. Caruthersville School District 18, 548 S.W.2d 554, 558(6) (Mo.banc 1977). The pleader is only required to state ultimate facts. It is not necessary to plead facts and circumstances by which the ultimate facts will be established. Scheibel v. Hillis, 531 S.W.2d 285, 290(14) (Mo.1976). If facts so pleaded, together with reasonable inferences that can be drawn from these allegations, show any ground upon which relief can be granted, the motion should be denied. Euge v. Golden, 551 S.W.2d 928, 931(4) (Mo.App.1977).
Keeping these general principles in mind, we consider the plaintiff's petition in light of the elements required to be pleaded and proved in a suit for alienation of affections.
"Alienation of affections is an intentional tort, and the elements of the cause of action are defendant's wrongful conduct, plaintiff's loss of the affections or consortium of his spouse, and the causal connection between such conduct of defendant and the loss by plaintiff. Gibson v. Frowein, 400 S.W.2d 418, 421(3) (Mo.banc 1966). We review plaintiff's petition to determine whether the allegations therein sufficiently plead the ultimate facts containing the elements outlined in Gibson.
(1) Wrongful conduct. Plaintiff alleges ". . . the defendant, well knowing the said JoAnn Sutton to be the wife of the plaintiff, and wrongfully intending to injure this plaintiff and deprive him of his said wife's comfort, society and assistance, willfully, wickedly and maliciously gained the affections of said JoAnn Sutton, and induced her to have carnal intercourse with him and sought to persuade her and entice her to leave plaintiff . . ."
(2) Plaintiff's loss of affections or consortium. The petition alleges that defendant alienated and destroyed plaintiff's wife's affection for plaintiff and that he has been deprived of the comfort, society and assistance of his wife.
(3) Causal connection. The petition alleges that by reason of the allegations of wrongful conduct set out in (1), plaintiff lost the affection of his wife for him, and that by reason thereof he was damaged in the sum of $10,000.
Here we have a petition which sets...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hyde v. City of Columbia
...only allege a state of ultimate facts which show the petitioner is entitled to relief and demands such a judgment. Rule 55.05; Sutton v. Sutton, 567 S.W.2d 147(1-3) (Mo.App.1978). The facts asserted in the affidavit of a party (as by response to an interrogatory) 2 are competent to intersti......
-
Fundermann v. Mickelson
...458, 461 (1932) (direct interference by defendant must have caused the wayward spouse's infatuation with defendant); Sutton v. Sutton, 567 S.W.2d 147, 148 (Mo.Ct.App.1978) (plaintiff need only show causal connection between defendant's conduct and alleged loss); Tice v. Mandel, 76 N.W.2d 12......
-
City of Kansas City v. Mary Don Co.
...Bk. & Tr. Co., 576 S.W.2d 310, 312 (Mo. banc 1978) cert. denied 444 U.S. 831, 100 S.Ct. 60, 62 L.Ed.2d 40 (1979); and Sutton v. Sutton, 567 S.W.2d 147, 147-48 (Mo.App.1978). The City's petition, although imperfectly or defectively stated, is not subject to dismissal if its allegations invok......
-
State v. Klos
...system or the standards governing a motion to dismiss, as the pleader is only required to state ultimate facts. Sutton v. Sutton, 567 S.W.2d 147, 148 (Mo. App. 1978). Likewise, although an attached exhibit is deemed part of a litigant's pleading "for all purposes," this does not mean that a......