Andrew Jackson Higgins

The case involved a lawsuit by Mariana Georgescu and her husband against K Mart Corporation for injuries from a slip and fall in one of its stores caused by spilled food on the floor, resulting in a miscarriage and other permanent injuries. The jury awarded damages to the plaintiffs, finding K Mart 80% at fault. On appeal, K Mart contended that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence of causation. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that circumstantial evidence, including testimony about the spill's presence and employee actions, was sufficient to submit the case to the jury on the issues of notice and causation.

torts & liability

The case involved a trustee of a trust created under the will of a Missouri domiciliary who sought a refund of Missouri income taxes paid on the trust's entire income for 1984 and 1985, arguing that the state could only tax income from Missouri sources without violating due process. The Administrative Hearing Commission had denied the refund, treating the trust as a resident trust under Missouri statute. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed that decision, holding that the state had sufficient nexus to tax all trust income because the settlor was domiciled in Missouri, the trust was created there, and the trust owned real estate in the state. The court applied its prior analysis from Swift v. Director of Revenue, finding these contacts provided the necessary benefits and protections to support the tax.

taxes

This case involves Johnny Lee Wilson, who pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and received a sentence of life imprisonment without parole; he later filed a Rule 24.035 motion to vacate the judgment, raising claims that his plea was involuntary due to mental retardation, that the State failed to disclose exculpatory evidence, and that he received ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel. The motion court denied relief after an evidentiary hearing, and the Missouri Supreme Court granted transfer after the court of appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court first held that it had jurisdiction because the timely filed, verified amended motion cured the lack of verification in the original pro se motion. It then affirmed the denial of relief, concluding that the motion court's findings were not clearly erroneous, that newly discovered evidence was not cognizable in this proceeding, and that the record supported the determination that Wilson's plea was voluntary.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Herbert Cline's conviction for possessing methamphetamine under Missouri law after police found the substance in a dresser drawer at the rural home he shared with his girlfriend and her children. The jury had convicted Cline based on evidence that the drawer was used exclusively by him and that he had been present shortly before the search. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Missouri considered both the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction and whether the trial court erred in giving the verdict-directing instruction to the jury. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to submit the case to the jury but reversed the judgment and remanded for a new trial because the instruction was erroneous. The core reasoning was that the instruction failed to properly require the jury to find that the defendant knew the nature of the substance he possessed.

criminal law

The case concerned a workers' compensation claim by independent contractor Roger West, who was injured while performing plumbing and electrical work on a house being constructed by David Posten for Posten's personal use. The Commission denied benefits, ruling that West was Posten's statutory employee under section 287.040.1 but that Posten was exempt from liability as the premises owner under section 287.040.3. The Missouri Supreme Court reversed the denial and remanded for calculation of benefits, holding that the owner exemption does not apply when the owner is simultaneously acting as his own general contractor on the project. The court reasoned that the statutory scheme extends liability to prevent evasion of coverage through independent contractors and that Posten qualified as a statutory employer because the work was performed under contract on premises he controlled and was part of his usual business operations.

labor & employment

The case concerned whether the Director of Revenue properly suspended Buttrick’s driver’s license under section 302.304 for accumulating eight points within an eighteen-month period. Buttrick had received two points each for speeding convictions in December 1986 and July 1987, plus six points assessed in June 1989 for a 1986 excessive blood alcohol conviction that was reported late. The trial court reinstated her driving privileges, and the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed that judgment. The court held that points accumulate only upon assessment by the Director following notification of a conviction, not upon the conviction itself, so the delayed assessment meant no eight-point total occurred within any eighteen-month window.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Fears, Roger Lee Fears was charged with second-degree murder after a confrontation with school bus driver Leroy Dunn over punishment for Fears' children escalated into a physical altercation, resulting in Dunn's death from a head injury. A jury convicted Fears of the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter and sentenced him to twelve years in prison. The court affirmed the conviction, finding sufficient evidence that Fears caused Dunn's death, acted with intent to cause serious injury under sudden passion rather than in self-defense, and satisfied the elements of corpus delicti. The court also upheld the trial judge's appointment of a special prosecutor from another county, holding that it fell within the court's discretion and caused no prejudice to the defendant.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Ivan Vinson's convictions on two counts of first-degree robbery, two counts of armed criminal action, and one count of kidnapping, along with his subsequent motion for postconviction relief under Missouri Rule 29.15. The Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed the trial court's judgments and sentences totaling thirty years' imprisonment, as well as the denial of the 29.15 motion. On direct appeal, the court found no abuse of discretion in denying a challenge for cause to a venirewoman whose husband had been a murder victim, held that testimony referencing other similar crimes did not require a mistrial after a curative instruction, and rejected challenges to in-court identifications. Regarding the postconviction motion, the court ruled that an unverified amended motion filed by counsel was a nullity that failed to invoke the circuit court's jurisdiction. A dissent argued that verification defects should be curable by amendment in civil postconviction proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

Charles White was convicted by a jury of first-degree assault and armed criminal action and sentenced as a prior offender to consecutive twenty-five-year terms. He filed a timely pro se motion under Rule 29.15 for post-conviction relief, and after counsel was appointed, an amended motion was filed following delays related to obtaining the trial transcript. The court resolved ambiguities in the timing requirements of Rules 29.15(b), (f), and (l) in favor of full review of the claims, interpreting the deadlines to begin once both counsel and the transcript are available. It then rejected White's arguments of insufficient evidence for the assault conviction and ineffective assistance of counsel concerning identification procedures, failure to depose or impeach the victim, and not calling rebuttal witnesses, finding the claims either waived, unsupported, or within reasonable trial strategy. The judgments of conviction and denial of post-conviction relief were affirmed.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Bertha and William Mahurin, who were convicted by a jury of endangering the welfare of their infant son Patrick and the involuntary manslaughter of his twin brother Joseph due to severe malnutrition and neglect. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences, rejecting challenges to the constitutionality of the child endangerment statute on grounds of vagueness and overbreadth. The court held that the statute provided fair notice of prohibited conduct through its plain meaning and that no prejudice resulted from the joint trial or admission of certain evidence, as statements by one defendant were duplicative of the other's admissions.

criminal lawfamily law

The case involved Cass Medical Center, a county-owned hospital organized under Missouri statutes, petitioning for a writ of prohibition to halt trial proceedings on a medical negligence and wrongful death claim brought by plaintiff Herschel Young. The Missouri Supreme Court made the preliminary writ absolute, ruling that the hospital could not be sued due to sovereign immunity. The core reasoning was that sovereign immunity remains fully in effect under section 537.600 except for narrow statutory exceptions involving dangerous property conditions or motor vehicle operation, and the hospital's insurance policy—which was limited to those specific risks plus certain non-immune employees—did not waive immunity for general entity-level medical negligence under section 537.610.

torts & liabilityprocedurehealthcare

This case involved a railroad engineer's Federal Employers’ Liability Act negligence claims against Missouri Pacific, alleging that inadequate speed limits, warning signals, and vegetation clearance at two grade crossings caused collisions that led to his post-traumatic stress disorder. Before trial, the court excluded the plaintiff's exhibits and related testimony about dangerous crossings and proposed safety improvements, relying on 23 U.S.C. § 409, which bars admission of certain safety reports and data compiled for federal highway funding purposes. The jury returned a verdict finding no negligence by either party, and the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that the federal statute applies retroactively to documents created before its 1987 effective date because it governs only procedural matters of evidence, and that its application in state court does not violate the Tenth Amendment under the reasoning of Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority.

proceduretorts & liabilityfederal power

The case involved a workers' compensation claim by the family of Mitchell Snowbarger, an employee of Tri-County Electric Cooperative who died in a car accident after working 86 of the preceding 100.5 hours during an ice storm emergency. The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission awarded full benefits, finding the accident arose out of and in the course of employment due to fatigue from the overtime, and the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed that award. The court held that the coming-and-going rule did not bar recovery because the employer's requirement of unusually long hours created an abnormal exposure to the peril of falling asleep while driving, which was causally connected to the employment even though the crash occurred about 22 miles from the workplace. It rejected a strict proximity requirement and found persuasive other jurisdictions' decisions applying similar exceptions for fatigue-related accidents after extended overtime.

labor & employment

The case involved Missouri taxpayers seeking refunds of state individual income taxes paid on retirement benefits from private employers for the years 1986-1988, arguing that the exemption for governmental retirement benefits created an unconstitutional classification under equal protection principles in the Missouri and U.S. Constitutions. The Administrative Hearing Commission denied the claims, and the court affirmed that decision. The court held that the legislature's distinction between governmental and nongovernmental retirees was reasonable and satisfied the lenient rationality standard for equal protection review, as it could be justified by interests such as attracting and retaining government employees or avoiding substantial fiscal costs. It found the tax applied uniformly within each class and distinguished contrary precedents as involving intergovernmental tax immunity rather than this type of classification.

taxescivil rights

This case involves Eric Schneider's appeal from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion to vacate his first-degree murder conviction and death sentence, after his direct appeal was affirmed. The court addressed claims of ineffective assistance of counsel for not seeking a mental health evaluation or presenting additional family testimony at the penalty phase, as well as a challenge to a jury instruction on mitigating circumstances. It also clarified the timing rules for filing amended post-conviction motions under Rule 29.15(f), directing that time limits begin from the earlier of counsel's appointment or entry of appearance. The court affirmed the denial of relief, finding that counsel's decisions were reasonable trial strategy, that Schneider failed to show prejudice, that the instruction was constitutional, and that claims of trial error were not cognizable in this proceeding. The judgment was affirmed with a directive on future application of the rule.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Bonneye Gammaitoni, operating as Videotech, appealing an Administrative Hearing Commission decision that upheld the Director of Revenue's assessment of additional sales and use taxes, interest, and penalties against her business for producing and selling videotapes and related services. The court affirmed the Commission's ruling in full, holding Gammaitoni liable as a successor to the prior owner under section 144.150 for unpaid taxes predating her acquisition of the business, despite her partial withholding of payment and receipt of a notarized statement from the prior owner. It further determined that sales of original and duplicate videotapes did not qualify for the advertising exemption under section 144.034 or interstate commerce exemptions under section 144.030 because no exemption certificates were collected as required by section 144.210, and that penalties were warranted due to willful neglect in failing to obtain a tax license or remit taxes on taxable transactions. The constitutional equal protection challenge to the advertising exemption was rejected implicitly through affirmance, and use tax liability followed from the sales tax determinations.

taxesbusiness & regulatory

Eric Clemmons was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder for killing a fellow prison inmate and sentenced to death; after his direct appeal was affirmed, he filed a pro se motion under Rule 29.15 to vacate the judgment and sentence, later supplemented by an amended motion. The motion court held an evidentiary hearing and denied all claims, and Clemmons appealed that denial. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed, first resolving an ambiguity in Rule 29.15(f) by clarifying that amended motions must be filed within thirty days of counsel's appointment (with any extension decided within that period) and applying the new construction prospectively, then reviewing the ineffective-assistance claims under Strickland v. Washington and finding counsel's performance reasonable and not prejudicial, rejecting challenges to jury instructions on mitigating circumstances as not cognizable or meritless, and upholding the exclusion of attorney opinion testimony on counsel's effectiveness.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Petary, the defendant was convicted by jury of first-degree murder and sentenced to death after he and an accomplice kidnapped a family in Iowa, raped one daughter, killed the mother in an attempted murder, and murdered the 12-year-old daughter Kathy by cutting her throat during a drive to Missouri. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence. It held that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of unadjudicated crimes during the penalty phase or in denying a second psychiatrist, and that various claims of plain error regarding jury instructions, closing arguments, jury selection, and admission of a codefendant's statements lacked merit. The court independently reviewed the case under section 565.035 and found the sentence proportionate to similar cases involving murders of potential witnesses, supported by valid aggravating circumstances of kidnapping and witness elimination, and not influenced by passion or prejudice.

criminal lawprocedure

In Walls v. State, the Missouri Supreme Court reviewed an appeal from the denial of a Rule 29.15 motion to vacate convictions for first-degree murder, robbery, and burglary, along with a death sentence, based on claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The appellant argued that counsel failed to object to evidence of prior arrests and flight, improperly elicited information about prior imprisonment, did not present sufficient mitigating evidence or witnesses at the penalty phase, and failed to object to demonstrative evidence remaining in the courtroom. The court affirmed the denial of relief, applying the Strickland v. Washington standard and concluding that counsel's performance was not deficient because challenged actions reflected reasonable trial strategy or would have been meritless objections, and that no prejudice resulted given the strength of the evidence including the defendant's confessions.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a Missouri doctor suing other Missouri doctors for tortious interference with a contract and related claims arising in Missouri; the plaintiff filed suit in Jackson County under the state's venue statute because the cause of action accrued there. The trial court dismissed the action on forum non conveniens grounds, but the Supreme Court of Missouri reversed that dismissal. The court reasoned that Missouri precedent limits the forum non conveniens doctrine to cases involving nonresident parties or claims arising outside the state, and that extending it to intrastate disputes between residents would improperly allow courts to override the legislature's specific venue rules, such as Section 508.010(6), which permits suit in the county where the tort accrued regardless of the parties' residences.

proceduretorts & liability