MacK v. MacK
349 S.W.3d 475
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Husband and Wife married September 29, 1973; they had three children, including Son.
- Son filed an unverified Motion to Intervene asserting a one-third interest in Mack Racing, Inc. as an asset to be divided.
- Son attached unverified exhibits describing Corporation's assets; no affidavits were provided.
- Hearing occurred with Husband, Wife, and Son present; amended motion named Corporation as applicant; trial court denied.
- Record on appeal lacks proof of any interest by Corporation or that disposition would impair Corporation's ability to protect that interest; no transcript provided.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention as of right under Rule 52.12(a)(2). | Corporation asserts an interest in the property subject to dissolution and potential impairment if not allowed to intervene. | Record does not contain evidence showing Corporation's interest or impairment from dissolution. | denial affirmed; record insufficient to prove entitlement |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of Langhorn v. Laws, 905 S.W.2d 908 (Mo.App.1995) (burden on movant; motion must be proven by record evidence)
- Bond v. Bond, 161 S.W.3d 859 (Mo.App.2005) (evidence supported corporation's intervention)
- Ryan v. Raytown Dodge Co., 296 S.W.3d 471 (Mo.App.2009) ( affidavits required when facts not on record)
- Cantwell v. Cantwell, 315 S.W.3d 384 (Mo.App.2010) (appellate record requirements; transcript duty)
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc. 1976) (abuse of discretionstandard for intervention decisions)