Swan v. Stuart

Citation350 S.W.2d 832
Decision Date06 November 1961
Docket NumberNo. 23365,23365
PartiesPaul SWAN and Frances Swan, Respondents, v. Jerrold STUART, Doing Business As McVay Motor Company, Appellant.
CourtCourt of Appeal of Missouri (US)

Russell N. Pickett, Eugene E. Andereck, Phil Hauck, Thomas O. Pickett, Pickett, Andereck & Hauck, Trenton, for appellant.

R. Leroy Miller, Trenton, for respondent.


Plaintiffs, Paul Swan and Frances Mae Swan, are husband and wife. They instituted this action against defendant seeking to recover damages growing out of an automobile collision. Plaintiffs' petition was in three counts. In Count I plaintiff, Frances Mae Swan, sought damages for personal injuries. In Count II both plaintiffs prayed for damages to their automobile, and in Count III, plaintiff, Paul Swan, asked damages for loss of his wife's services.

The jury returned a verdict awarding plaintiff, Frances Mae Swan, $1,000 for personal injuries (Count I of plaintiffs' petition), and gave plaintiffs nothing for damages to their automobile (Count II) and awarded plaintiff, Paul Swan, $380 for loss of his wife's services (Count III).

Judgment was entered upon the verdict, and in due time defendant filed his motion for new trial. That motion was taken up by the trial court on November 28, 1960, and 'sustained as to Count II and Count III of plaintiffs' petition, and overruled as to Count I of plaintiffs' petition.' Thereafter, defendant took this appeal.

While the issue has not been raised by the parties, it becomes our duty to determine whether a final appealable judgment has been entered in the cause. Young v. Raupp, 301 S.W.2d 873, 874 (Mo.App.) The right of appeal is purely statutory. Section 512.020, V.A.M.S. provides that an appeal may be taken 'from any final judgment in the case.' A judgment is defined by Section 511.020 as 'the final determination of the right of the parties in the action.' A judgment to be final must dispose of all parties and all issues in the cause. Our statute does not allow parties to appeal piecemeal or permit them to bring one issue in a case to an appellate court while other issues therein remain undecided in the trial court. Magee v. Mercantile-Commerce Bank & Trust Co., 339 Mo. 559, 98 S.W.2d 614. The only exception to this rule is where the trial court orders a separate trial of a claim or issue (which is not the situation here) as contemplated by the provisions of Section 510.180(2) and Civil Rule 82.06, V.A.M.R.

According to the record...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • First Presbyterian Church of Monett v. Feist, 8523
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 9, 1965
    ...v. Ellis, Mo., 376 S.W.2d 197, 204. Is the order of dismissal an appealable judgment? Appeals cannot be taken piecemeal (Swan v. Stuart, Mo.App., 350 S.W.2d 832, 833; Pizzo v. Pizzo, 365 Mo. 1224, 295 S.W.2d 377, 380) unless separate trial and judgment is ordered (Civil Rule 82.06) or excep......
  • Lynch v. Webb City School Dist. No. 92, 8194
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 6, 1963
    ...of all the issues in the case and if it is not final the judgment is not appealable. Appeals cannot be allowed piecemeal. Swan v. Stuart, Mo.App., 350 S.W.2d 832; Bays v. Lueth, Mo., 323 S.W.2d 236. But the appellate courts should avoid disposition of appeals on procedural grounds 'when per......
  • Rakestraw v. Norris, 8995
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • July 7, 1971
    ...disposed only of Count One) and held the verdict in abeyance pending resubmission, or other disposition, of Count Two. Swan v. Stuart, Mo.App., 350 S.W.2d 832, 833; Suddarth v. Empire Lime Company, 79 Mo.App. 585, We therefore have before us a judgment which leaves one separate and distinct......
  • Swan v. Stuart
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 5, 1962
    ...where the case was argued and submitted. On November 6, 1961, we held that the appeal was premature and dismissed the same. (See Mo.App., 350 S.W.2d 832). On November 30, 1961, plaintiffs dismissed Counts II and III of their petition without prejudice. The trial court thereupon entered fina......
  • 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