Crest construction II, and Metro Energy, Inc. v. John D. Hart
2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 879
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Crest Construction II, Inc. and Metro Energy, Inc. (owned by Randall Robb) sued multiple defendants alleging breaches of contract, fraud, conversion, and civil conspiracy arising from business dealings involving purchase of vehicle contracts and notes from December 2003–2004.
- Crest filed the original complaint in federal court (W.D. Mo.) on October 4, 2007, including a RICO count that provided federal jurisdiction.
- The district court dismissed the RICO count and declined supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims, dismissing them without prejudice on August 27, 2010; the Eighth Circuit affirmed on October 31, 2011.
- Crest filed a state-court petition in Clay County on September 24, 2010, and amended it on December 15, 2011; an interlocutory default was entered for some defendants on October 26, 2011.
- On September 28, 2012 the state court granted defendants’ joint motion to dismiss, finding the claims time-barred, barred by the statute of frauds, and inadequately pleaded; on June 28, 2013 the court entered a dismissal with prejudice as to "all defendants," but expressly excepted the earlier interlocutory default judgment against John and Dee Hart.
- The appellants challenged tolling from the federal action and asserted full performance to avoid the statute of frauds; the appellate court found the state court’s June 28, 2013 judgment was not final and dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statute of limitations was tolled by prior federal litigation | Federal dismissal of RICO claim tolled state claims because same transactions and same causes of action were litigated | No tolling; state claims time-barred | Not decided on merits — appeal dismissed for lack of finality |
| Whether oral contract is enforceable despite statute of frauds due to full performance | Crest paid over $1.6M and thus fully performed, so oral contract falls within exception | Contract violates statute of frauds and is unenforceable | Not decided on merits — appeal dismissed for lack of finality |
| Whether trial court’s dismissal was final and appealable | (implicit) judgment disposing of all defendants was final | Trial court did not resolve damages as to defendants subject to interlocutory default; no certification under Rule 74.01(b) | Appeal dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction because judgment was not final |
| Whether trial court needed to expressly state "no just reason for delay" to permit immediate appeal | (implicit) such a statement could render judgment final | Trial court did not make such a statement; therefore appeal cannot proceed | Court did not reach substance; required express certification absent to permit appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. St. Luke’s Home Health Care, 200 S.W.3d 592 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006) (appellate jurisdiction requires final judgment disposing of all parties and issues)
- Davis v. Howe, 144 S.W.3d 899 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004) (trial court must expressly determine "no just reason for delay" for partial final judgments to be appealable)
- Green v. Study, 250 S.W.3d 799 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008) (damages are essential to finality of a judgment)
- Gordon v. Babcock, 149 S.W.3d 546 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004) (discusses necessity of resolving damages for appealability)