Biersmith v. Curry Ass'n Management, Inc.
2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1387
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Biersmith was allegedly trapped in an elevator at Santa Fe Place Condominiums in Kansas City on April 19, 2007.
- Biersmith filed a small claims action against Curry on October 20, 2009 for $3,000 related to the Incident.
- He claimed psychological injuries (loss of sleep, nightmares) but did not obtain medical treatment.
- He did not miss work due to the alleged psychological injuries.
- Curry moved for summary judgment on August 16, 2010; Biersmith did not respond.
- The trial court granted summary judgment, concluding no genuine issues of material fact and Curry entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether proof of medically diagnosable emotional distress is required | Biersmith argues evolving trends without documentation support. | Curry maintains Missouri law requires medically diagnosable and medically significant distress. | For this issue, the court held Missouri law requires diagnosable and significant distress; summary judgment proper. |
| Whether Missouri law should yield to evolving trends from other states | Biersmith claims an evolving trend disfavors the current strict Missouri standard. | Curry argues no deviation from Bass and established Missouri law. | Court rejected deviation; Missouri law remains controlling. |
| Whether the appeal was frivolous and warrants Rule 84.19 sanctions | N/A (appeal pro se) | Appeal frivolous given noncompliance and lack of merit | Court found the appeal frivolous and awarded attorney's fees to Curry. |
| Whether to award Curry attorney's fees incurred responding to the appeal | N/A | N/A | Remand for entry of additional judgment in Curry's favor for reasonable fees and costs. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bass v. Nooney Co., 646 S.W.2d 765 (Mo. banc 1983) (no longer requires contemporaneous physical injury for NIED)
- Ford v. Aldi, 832 S.W.2d 1 (Mo. App. W.D. 1992) (recognizes medical proof not necessary for NIED; relies on Bass)
- Jarrett v. Jones, 258 S.W.3d 442 (Mo. banc 2008) (establishes required elements for NIED including diagnosable distress)
- Vanschoiack v. Adkins, 854 S.W.2d 432 (Mo. App. W.D. 1993) (factors for frivolous appeal sanctions under Rule 84.19)
- Patrick v. Monte Owens Agency, Inc., 332 S.W.3d 917 (Mo. App. W.D. 2011) (compliance required with Rule 84.04; briefing standards)