The general rule is that a party is responsible for his/her own attorney fees in litigation, regardless of the outcome. The usual exception to this rule is if there is an applicable statute or contract which calls for an award of attorney fees. “Whether a trial court had authority to award attorney fees is a question…
Resulting Trusts
Resulting trusts and constructive trusts are nebulous equity concepts in the law. Both are generally viewed as remedies. Both are “implied trusts.” Colonial Presbyterian Church v. Heartland, 375 S.W.3d 190, 195 (Mo. App. W.D. 2012). A resulting trust is “implied by law to meet the requirements of justice that a legal status be given to what…
Probate Deadlines
Deadlines in probate litigation and administration are often unforgiving. For instance, a will must be presented to the correct probate court within a year or it is essentially a dead letter. Will contests and estate disputes must be pursued very quickly. When it comes to probate deadlines, Missouri Courts have “consistently rejected such policy arguments…
Equitable Relief, Pleadings
At trial, a court is limited to the relief requested in the pleadings. The “pleadings” generally refers to the petition, answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaim. While there are numerous exceptions to this, a prominent exception includes equitable relief. While Missouri courts are restrained from deciding an unpleaded fatual issue, a court of equity grant any…
Premises Liability: Third-Party Criminal Acts
As a general rule, if a customer/invitee of a business is harmed by a third-party criminal act, the business is not responsible. The rationale for this rule is that criminal acts are rarely foreseeable. Early v. Dunn, 670 S.W.3d 47, 51 (Mo. App. E.D. 2023). There are a number of exceptions. First, a duty arises…
Determining a Grantor’s Intent in Trusts
When interpreting a trust, the Settlor’s “intent is controlling and such intention must be ascertained primarily from the trust instrument as a whole.” Berezo v. Berezo, 628 S.W.3d 737, 743-44 (Mo. App. E.D. 2021). Because language and circumstances vary, the Court must examine “the specific language as well as the surrounding circumstances.” Matter of TR…
Mootness, Exceptions
Courts generally shy away from rendering decisions in moot cases. A case is moot when “the question presented for decision seeks a judgment upon some matter which, if the judgment was rendered, would not have any practical effect upon any then existing controversy.” DCM v. Pemiscot County Juvenile Office, 578 S.W.3d 776, 780 (Mo. 2019). There…
Comity, Multiple Lawsuits, Litigation
In complex situations, it is not uncommon for multiple lawsuits to be pending in multiple jurisdictions. When this occurs, one court, in the interests of comity, may allow the other court to handle the entire dispute. At the state level in Missouri, comity is not an ironclad rule, but a rule of “practice, convenience, and…
Contracts: General versus Specific Provisions
Parties are bound to the terms of the contract they sign, unless induced by fraud, duress, or undue influence. Lehman v. Automotive Investments, LLC, 608 S.W.3d 733, 738 (Mo. App. E.D. 2020). In analyzing contracts, courts focus on the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used. Id. Often times, however, a conflict can arise between what…
Successor in Interest, Powers of Attorney
The term “successor in interest,” as of this writing, has not been defined in the context of power of attorney litigation. When someone mismanages his/her authority under a power of attorney, the principal, or his/her successors in interest, can file suit. The relevant statute defines “successor in interest”: “For purposes of this section, the principal’s…