Builtrite Construction Co., Respondent, v. Aola Carter, Appellant.

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style: Builtrite Construction Co., Respondent, v. Aola Carter, Appellant. Case Number: 72739 Handdown Date: 05/19/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Cout of St. Louis County, Hon. Brenda Stith Loftin Counsel for Appellant: Pro Se Counsel for Respondent: Ryan Shaughnessy Opinion Summary: Aola Carter appeals the circuit court's judgment in favor of Builtrite Construction Co., on Builtrite's suit for damages and attorney's fees. DISMISSED. Division One holds: Carter did not file a motion for new trial and, therefore, failed to preserve for review issues concerning a request for continuance and the admission of photographs and testimony into evidence. Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: DISMISSED. Grimm, P.J., Pudlowski, and Gaertner, J.J., concur. Opinion: Appellant, Aola Carter, appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County entered in favor of respondent, Builtrite Construction Co. We affirm.(FN1) Builtrite contracted to perform certain improvements to Carter's home. After the majority of the work was completed and after several disagreements between Carter and the various builders and entities involved, Carter refused to allow Builtrite onto her property to finish the work under the contract. Builtrite subsequently filed suit for damages and

attorney's fees under the theories of breach of contract, quantum meruit, and suit on account. After trial, the jury returned its verdict in favor of Builtrite in the amount of $11,954.00. Carter appeals. The issues raised by Carter in her appeal, including claims the trial court erred in denying a request for continuance and in excluding certain photographs and testimony from evidence, were not preserved for review. Rule 78.07 requires issues raised on appeal must first be presented to the trial court in a motion for new trial in cases tried by a jury. The record indicates no motion for new trial was filed here. Moreover, we find no plain error. Rule 84.13(c). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. Footnotes: FN1. Builtrite's motion for attorney's fees in the amount of $500.00 incurred on appeal is granted. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.