Roy Renegar v. Richard Borman, ED113102

Renegar and R&R Propane appealed the circuit court's denial of their motion to compel arbitration against Borman and his entities, related to disputes over R&R Propane's business activities and assets.
The parties, after extensive litigation and discovery disputes, entered a consent order possibly providing for arbitration, subject to certain conditions regarding discovery and material facts.
At a September 2023 hearing, concerns were raised about whether arbitration would be mandatory if significant discovery affected material facts, with the order reflecting arbitration could be bypassed if discovery revealed substantive issues.
After deadlines in the consent order were missed, Renegar moved in April 2024 to compel arbitration, but Borman resisted, citing conditions within the consent order and procedural concerns.
The circuit court, after reviewing the record and arguments, overruled Renegar’s motion to compel arbitration.
On appeal, Renegar’s brief was found noncompliant with Missouri Rule 84.04, lacking proper points relied on, legal authority, record citations, and a compliant appendix, leading to dismissal of his appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Enforcing Arbitration Agreement	Circuit court ignored Missouri public policy favoring arbitration	Discovery unresolved; agreement to arbitrate was conditional	Appeal dismissed for briefing deficiencies
Scope/Interpretation of Consent Order	Court failed to interpret order as a whole	Arbitration conditional on discovery affecting material facts	Appeal dismissed for briefing deficiencies
Existence of Arbitration Agreement	Borman admitted arbitration agreement existed	Renegar failed to show agreement as per statute	Appeal dismissed for briefing deficiencies
Meaningfulness of Consent Order Provisions	Court's interpretation rendered order meaningless	Provisions allowed avoidance of arbitration under some outcomes	Appeal dismissed for briefing deficiencies
Evidentiary Hearing Requirement	Court erred by not holding an evidentiary hearing	Circuit court did examine record and held arguments	Appeal dismissed for briefing deficiencies

Lexow v. Boeing Co., 643 S.W.3d 501 (Mo. banc 2022) (mandatory nature of appellate briefing requirements)
Parkside Fin. Bank & Tr. v. Allen, 688 S.W.3d 83 (Mo. App. E.D. 2024) (compliance with appellate briefing rules)
Jones v. Impact Agape Ministries, 693 S.W.3d 122 (Mo. App. E.D. 2023) (briefing deficiencies and appellate review)
Washington v. Blackburn, 286 S.W.3d 818 (Mo. App. E.D. 2009) (grounds for dismissal due to deficient statement of facts)