History
  • No items yet
midpage
E.M.B. v. A.L.
462 S.W.3d 450
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2015
Read the full case

Background

  • E.M.B. and A.L. were co-workers at a Domino’s; they were never in a relationship. E.M.B. complained to management that A.L. sexually harassed her, and A.L. was fired.
  • After termination, A.L. sent multiple angry text messages to E.M.B. in January 2014 (accusing her of causing his firing, alleging drug use, giving her parents’ number, and mocking her job prospects); A.L. admitted sending them.
  • In spring 2014 A.L. placed a 1:53 a.m. pizza order (E.M.B. was on duty) and later asked at delivery where E.M.B. was, which frightened her.
  • On May 15, 2014, A.L. videotaped E.M.B. returning to work; she reported it to management and police. A.L. also texted E.M.B.’s managers that he had taken her picture and would contact corporate.
  • E.M.B. petitioned for an order of protection alleging stalking and videotaping; the trial court granted a full order of protection. A.L. appealed, arguing the evidence did not satisfy Missouri’s stalking statute.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether A.L.'s conduct constituted "stalking" under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 455.010(13) A.L.’s repeated texts, late-night pizza order, and videotaping at work were an unwanted course of conduct causing alarm and fear. A.L. argued the conduct did not produce a reasonable fear of physical harm; texts contained no physical threats and videotaping/ordering pizza alone are insufficient. Reversed: evidence insufficient to show a course of conduct that reasonably caused fear of physical harm; conduct did not meet statutory stalking.

Key Cases Cited

  • Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976) (standard of review in court-tried civil cases)
  • E.A.B. v. C.G.W., 415 S.W.3d 795 (Mo.App. E.D. 2013) (discusses caution in labeling conduct as stalking under Adult Abuse Act)
  • M.D.L. v. S.C.E., 391 S.W.3d 525 (Mo.App. E.D. 2013) (insufficient evidence of fear of physical harm despite repeated hostile acts)
  • Binggeli v. Hammond, 300 S.W.3d 621 (Mo.App. W.D. 2010) (reversed full order where plaintiff failed to prove fear of physical harm)
  • George v. McLuckie, 227 S.W.3d 503 (Mo.App. W.D. 2007) (text messages and occasional driving by employer insufficient to prove stalking)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: E.M.B. v. A.L.
Court Name: Missouri Court of Appeals
Date Published: May 19, 2015
Citation: 462 S.W.3d 450
Docket Number: No. ED 101701
Court Abbreviation: Mo. Ct. App.