Randall Graves v. Missouri Department of Corrections, the Division of Probation and Parole, SC98501

Randall Graves pleaded guilty to receiving stolen property and was placed on five years’ supervised probation with condition #10 requiring payment of a monthly intervention fee set by the Missouri Department of Corrections (the Division).
The Division sent Graves a letter stating he was required to pay $30/month, that he had a $60 overdue balance, and that failure to pay "may place [you] in violation status."
Graves’ only income is $771/month in federal SSI; he petitioned for a declaratory judgment that his SSI is exempt from collection under the federal anti-attachment provision, 42 U.S.C. § 407(a).
The Division moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim; the circuit court dismissed with prejudice. Graves appealed to the Supreme Court of Missouri.
The Supreme Court held Graves’ petition was not ripe because the Division had taken no final, binding action to enforce collection or impose sanctions; the Court affirmed dismissal on the merits but reversed the dismissal with prejudice and entered dismissal without prejudice.
A dissent argued the petition did plead a ripe controversy because the fee was already imposed as a probation condition and thus created an immediate legal obligation implicating § 407(a).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ripeness of declaratory judgment challenging collection/sanction under 42 U.S.C. § 407(a)	Letter + probation condition create an immediate threat; § 407(a) bars "other legal process" on SSI; declaratory relief is appropriate now	Letter was nonbinding; statute gives the Division discretion to collect or waive fees; no final agency action and enforcement is speculative	Court: Not ripe — plaintiff seeks an advisory opinion; dismissal for failure to state a claim was proper
Whether the imposition of the intervention fee as a probation condition constitutes "other legal process" under § 407(a)	The fee condition itself effectively compels use of SSI and thus qualifies as prohibited legal process	Division contends enforcement, if any, is discretionary and not yet effectuated; Court need not resolve the statutory question absent ripeness	Court declined to decide the merits of whether the fee-condition is "other legal process" because the case is unripe
Dismissal with prejudice vs. without prejudice	If dismissal is required, it should be without prejudice so Graves may litigate later if Division enforces the fee	Circuit court dismissed with prejudice (but Division acknowledged dismissal with prejudice was erroneous)	Supreme Court reversed the with-prejudice dismissal and entered dismissal without prejudice

Mo. State Conf. of NAACP v. State, 601 S.W.3d 241 (Mo. banc 2020) (declaratory-judgment justiciability and pleading standard)
Mo. Soybean Ass'n v. Mo. Clean Water Comm'n, 102 S.W.3d 10 (Mo. banc 2003) (ripeness: preliminary agency actions that do not create legal rights are not reviewable)
Calzone v. Ashcroft, 559 S.W.3d 32 (Mo. banc 2018) (ripeness and developed dispute required for judicial determination)
Abbott Labs. v. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (U.S. 1967) (ripeness doctrine protecting agencies from premature judicial review)
Missouri Ass'n of Nurse Anesthetists v. State Bd. of Registration for Healing Arts, 343 S.W.3d 348 (Mo. banc 2011) (ripeness where agency adopted final position and enforcement ensued)
Farm Bureau Town & Country Ins. Co. of Mo. v. Angoff, 909 S.W.2d 348 (Mo. banc 1995) (no justiciable controversy where agency has not made a final determination)
State ex rel. Henley v. Bickel, 285 S.W.3d 327 (Mo. banc 2009) (motion-to-dismiss standard and liberal inference rules)