Dahn v. Dahn
2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 913
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Marriage of Susan and Marcus Dahn dissolved December 2006; Wife alleged Husband misappropriated twenty-three distribution checks payable to Wife from their closely-held A-1 Alarms, Inc.
- Checks totaling $235,200 were issued July 22, 2000–January 17, 2003; Husband endorsed and deposited them into his Bank accounts rather than delivering to Wife.
- Dissolution settlement awarded Husband control of A-1 stock and the disputed bank accounts; Wife waived claims to the funds in those accounts and received other consideration.
- Wife filed this action October 9, 2007, asserting conversion and fiduciary-duty claims against Husband and A-1, and a conversion claim against First Community Bank; the circuit court granted summary judgment for all defendants.
- Court held that res judicata barred Wife’s claims against Husband and A-1, and that Wife cannot prevail on a Bank conversion claim because no delivery of the checks to Wife or her agent occurred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wife’s claims against Husband and A-1 are barred by res judicata | Dahn reasserts new theories post-dissolution | Dahn and A-1 previously litigated these issues in the dissolution action | Yes, barred by res judicata |
| Whether Wife can claim conversion against the Bank without delivery of the checks | Wife alleges Husband acted as her agent with apparent authority | Delivery requirement defeats conversion claim since no delivery occurred | Yes, conversion claim against Bank fails |
Key Cases Cited
- Kesterson v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 242 S.W.3d 712 (Mo. banc 2008) (claim preclusion; split of first and second actions must be based on same transaction)
- Chesterfield Village, Inc. v. City of Chesterfield, 64 S.W.3d 315 (Mo. banc 2002) (definition of claim; 'thing sued for' and 'cause of action')
- Yates v. Yates, 680 S.W.2d 361 (Mo. App. E.D. 1984) (post-dissolution conversion barred when related to property division)
- Horwitz v. Horwitz, 16 S.W.3d 599 (Mo. App. E.D. 2000) (necessaries/recovery barred when arising from dissolution unless joined)
- S.A.V. v. K.G.V., 708 S.W.2d 651 (Mo. banc 1986) ( dicta on res judicata and post-dissolution tort claims)
- Sotirescu v. Sotirescu, 52 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. App. E.D. 2001) (personal-injury action not barred when separate from dissolution)
- Nebbitt v. Nebbitt, 589 S.W.2d 297 (Mo. banc 1979) (conversion/privacy of nonmarital property context post-dissolution)