Baxter v. Stidham, 557 S.W.3d 527

Plaintiffs are judgment creditors of Anna and Matt Stidham, who conveyed substantially all assets (farm and store real estate) to their daughters Sarah and Lori without consideration and with badges of fraud.
Plaintiffs sued under the Missouri fraudulent-conveyance statute seeking to void the conveyance, damages, interest, and costs.
After litigation, Defendant Parents filed bankruptcy, which stayed collection and resulted in a discharge as to personal liability, but the bankruptcy court permitted Plaintiffs to pursue claims concerning the real estate.
On the morning of a scheduled jury trial, the trial court sua sponte discharged the jury and announced the case would be tried to the bench as an equitable action; counsel stated they would not waive a jury right “if one exists.”
The court conducted a bench trial, found a fraudulent transfer by clear and convincing evidence, and set aside the deed; no damages or interest were submitted to or awarded by the court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether defendants were entitled to a jury trial where the petition sought damages and equitable relief	Plaintiffs had pleaded damages but had effectively abandoned damages and sought equitable relief (setting aside conveyance); court could try case in equity without a jury	Defendants argued pleadings entitled them to a jury because plaintiff’s petition sought damages and equitable relief	Court affirmed bench trial: action was equitable in nature, plaintiffs had no right to jury on equitable relief and no prejudice shown
Whether deed could be set aside given conveyance of entireties property without a joint money judgment against both spouses	Plaintiffs relied on existing judgment listing parents as jointly and severally liable and sought to enforce lien/void conveyance	Defendants argued plaintiffs lacked a true joint money judgment necessary to attack entireties property	Court rejected collateral-attack argument too late and upheld use of prior judgment; Point fails

State ex rel. Diehl v. O'Malley, 95 S.W.3d 82 (Mo. banc 2003) (distinguishes actions at law and in equity for jury-right analysis)
State ex rel. Leonardi v. Sherry, 137 S.W.3d 462 (Mo. banc 2004) (claims for damages should be tried to a jury while equity claims are reserved to the court)
Interest of K.R.T., 505 S.W.3d 864 (Mo. App. 2016) (judgment challenges must be by direct appeal, not collateral attack)
Brown v. Brown, 423 S.W.3d 784 (Mo. banc 2014) (preservation rules require timely objection to trial court rulings)
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. v. Pyle, 518 S.W.3d 805 (Mo. App. 2017) (costs recovery does not alter jury-right analysis)
Estate of Lambur, 317 S.W.3d 616 (Mo. App. 2010) (related background on the parties' prior appeals)