David & Amy Schmidt v. Dart Bein, LC, WD84253, WD84490, WD84491

In April 2017 Dart Bein contracted to buy Unit 203, two parking spaces, and storage unit S7 from David & Amy Schmidt; contract required delivery of marketable fee simple title.
Sellers could not deliver clear title to the storage unit at closing; parties executed an escrow agreement withholding funds ($10,000 tied to the storage unit) and gave the Schmidts 45 days to cure.
After 45 days title was not conveyed; Dart Bein requested and received the escrowed funds; months later the Schmidts executed and delivered a deed for the storage unit and requested the escrow funds back, which Dart Bein refused.
The Schmidts sued for breach of contract and unjust enrichment (seeking attorneys’ fees); Dart Bein counterclaimed for breach and sought attorneys’ fees; bench trial was held and the court denied the Schmidts’ claims and Dart Bein’s counterclaim but the judgment was silent on attorneys’ fees.
Both parties filed post-trial motions for attorneys’ fees (one to amend the judgment to award fees); the trial court did not rule on those motions before the Schmidts appealed (a later order on one motion was entered after the notice of appeal).
The Missouri Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the trial court’s December 15, 2020 judgment was not final and appealable due to unresolved attorneys’ fees requests; motions for fees on appeal denied without prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the December 15, 2020 judgment was a final, appealable judgment despite the trial court’s silence on attorneys’ fees	Schmidts: the judgment disposed of all claims and thus is final; no fee award was appropriate since neither side prevailed	Dart Bein: unresolved fee motions (including its motion to amend) leave an outstanding claim; judgment is not final	The judgment was not final because the trial court did not resolve the pleaded requests for attorneys’ fees; appellate court lacks jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal
Whether an unresolved request for attorneys’ fees (pleaded and pursued after trial) arrests finality even when main claims are adjudicated	Schmidts: rely on precedent suggesting fees need not be awarded when neither party prevailed (argument that fees should not have been awarded)	Dart Bein: a pending motion to amend judgment to include fees preserves an unresolved issue that must be decided by the trial court	Unresolved attorneys’ fees requests prevent finality; the trial court must dispose of the fee issue before a final judgment exists; appeal dismissed

Flower Valley, LLC v. Zimmerman, 575 S.W.3d 497 (Mo. App. E.D. 2019) (final judgment must dispose of all claims)
Crawford v. Distributor Operations, Inc., 561 S.W.3d 463 (Mo. App. E.D. 2018) (appeal lies only from final judgment)
Cupit v. Dry Basement, Inc., 592 S.W.3d 417 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020) (trial court must resolve post-trial fee requests before judgment is final)
Ndegwa v. KSSO, LLC, 371 S.W.3d 798 (Mo. banc 2012) (final judgment leaves nothing for future determination)
Ruby v. Troupe, 580 S.W.3d 112 (Mo. App. W.D. 2019) (unresolved attorneys’ fees can defeat appellate jurisdiction)
Parkway Constr. Servs. v. Blackline LLC, 573 S.W.3d 652 (Mo. App. E.D. 2019) (attorneys’ fees only recoverable when provided by statute or contract)
Fid. Real Estate Co. v. Norman, 586 S.W.3d 873 (Mo. App. W.D. 2019) (post-trial fee claims must be resolved to permit appeal)
Corley v. Corley, 128 S.W.3d 521 (Mo. App. W.D. 2003) (discusses when fee awards are inappropriate where neither party prevailed)
Heifetz v. Apex Clayton, Inc., 554 S.W.3d 389 (Mo. banc 2018) (timely post-judgment motions can extend trial court’s jurisdiction)