Lane House Construction, Inc. v. Lufeo Douglas Sithole, Patricia Sithole, and Mary Ann Liebman
2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 822
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Respondents (Lufeo and Patricia Sithole, Mary Ann Liebman) hired Lane House Construction to repair hail/water damage to their St. Louis home.
- Lane House invoiced $12,043.03; Respondents paid $8,048.27, leaving $3,994.76 claimed due by Lane House.
- Disputes arose about materials, workmanship, and subcontractor failures (e.g., old garage siding not removed, lack of insulation); correcting those issues would cost $5,635.36.
- Lane House sued for breach of contract / account / quantum meruit / unjust enrichment seeking the remaining $3,994.76; Respondents counterclaimed for breach of contract and fraud and sought damages.
- After a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment for Respondents awarding $5,635.36 on the counterclaim, but the judgment did not specify which counterclaim count(s) the award addressed.
- Lane House appealed; the court of appeals dismissed the appeal because the trial court’s judgment was not a final, appealable judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Lane House) | Defendant's Argument (Respondents) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate court has authority because judgment was final | Judgment in favor of Respondents is final and appealable | Judgment is unclear as to which counterclaim count it resolves, so not final | Judgment not final; appeal dismissed |
| Whether trial court abused discretion by setting aside default judgment | Default judgment against Patricia Sithole and Mary Liebman should have remained (no good cause to set aside) | Setting aside was proper (good cause) | Court declined to reach merits because of lack of final judgment (issue not resolved on appeal) |
| Whether monetary award should be offset by invoice balance | Any award to Respondents should be offset by $3,994.76 Lane House claims is still owed | Award stands as entered by trial court | Not reached due to dismissal for lack of final judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Bellinger v. Lindsey, 480 S.W.3d 345 (Mo. App. E.D.) (appellate court must determine jurisdiction before addressing merits)
- Gordon v. Heiler, 352 S.W.3d 411 (Mo. App. E.D.) (judgment must dispose of counterclaim to be final)
- Buemi v. Kerckhoff, 359 S.W.3d 16 (Mo. banc) (final judgment is prerequisite to appellate review)
- Polk v. Essen, 249 S.W.3d 914 (Mo. App. E.D.) (right of appeal is statutory)
- S & P Props. v. Bannister, 292 S.W.3d 404 (Mo. App. E.D.) (final judgment disposes of all parties and issues)
- Okello v. Beebe, 930 S.W.2d 40 (Mo. App. W.D.) (single monetary award on multi-count petition without allocation is not final)
- Anchovy Pizza, L.L.C. v. Hoffman, 16 S.W.3d 754 (Mo. App. E.D.) (judgment awarding damages should indicate which counts are resolved)
- McDonough v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 921 S.W.2d 90 (Mo. App. E.D.) (judgment on one count may be final if it necessarily precludes recovery on other counts)
- Fallin v. McClain, 639 S.W.2d 391 (Mo. App. S.D.) (judgment must dispose of all counts to be final)