First National Bank of Dieterich v. Pointe Royale Property Owners' Ass'n, 2017 Mo. LEXIS 101

Pointe Royale POA governed a condominium community and could collect assessments via liens or as personal obligations under its recorded Declaration.
The Bank held deeds of trust on eight condos; owners became delinquent on loans and POA assessments, and POA filed liens for past-due assessments.
The Bank foreclosed on the deeds of trust, purchased the eight units at foreclosure sale, and thereafter paid assessments the POA demanded (including amounts due before the Bank’s purchases).
The Bank sued the POA seeking (1) a declaratory judgment that pre-foreclosure assessment liens were extinguished by foreclosure and that the Bank was not personally liable (seeking refund), and (2) damages for slander of title based on the POA’s statements about the Bank’s alleged liability.
At bench trial, the court granted declaratory relief and ordered refunds on Count I, reserved Count II (slander of title) for later, and certified the partial judgment for immediate appeal under Rule 74.01(b).
The Missouri Supreme Court sua sponte dismissed the appeal, holding the partial judgment was not a final, appealable decision because it did not resolve a distinct judicial unit given the factual overlap between the counts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court’s partial judgment (declaring Bank not liable for pre-foreclosure assessments) is appealable as a final judgment under §512.020(5) and Rule 74.01(b)	Bank: Count I was a final, separable judicial unit; Rule 74.01(b) certification renders it appealable	POA: Counts arise from same transaction; partial judgment does not dispose of a distinct judicial unit so not appealable	Not appealable: judgment did not resolve a distinct judicial unit because Count I and Count II arise from the same set of facts; appeal dismissed

Gibson v. Brewer, 952 S.W.2d 239 (Mo. banc 1997) (partial judgment not appealable when remaining counts arise from same facts)
Buemi v. Kerckhoff, 359 S.W.3d 16 (Mo. banc 2011) (Rule 74.01(b) permits severance of unrelated substantive claims but does not expand statutory right to appeal)
State ex rel. Coca-Cola Co. v. Nixon, 249 S.W.3d 855 (Mo. banc 2008) (appeal is purely statutory right)
Transit Cas. Co. ex rel. Pulitzer Publ’g Co. v. Transit Cas. Co. ex rel. Intervening Errups., 43 S.W.3d 293 (Mo. banc 2001) (final judgment resolves all issues and leaves nothing for future determination)
Comm. for Educ. Equal v. State, 878 S.W.2d 446 (Mo. banc 1994) (declaratory judgment not appealable when injunctive claims arising from same facts remain)
Ndegwa v. KSSO, LLC, 371 S.W.3d 798 (Mo. banc 2012) (counts based on same underlying transaction cannot be severed for appeal under Rule 74.01(b))
Kivland v. Columbia Orthopaedic Grp., LLP, 331 S.W.3d 299 (Mo. banc 2011) (distinct judicial unit requires differing, separate transactions or occurrences)