David Brown, Plaintiff/Respondent v. Joanne Brown, Defendant/Appellant.
Decision date: UnknownED87007
Slip Opinion Notice
This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.
Opinion
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: David Brown, Plaintiff/Respondent v. Joanne Brown, Defendant/Appellant. Case Number: ED87007 Handdown Date: 03/14/2006 Appeal From: Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Hon. Dennis J. Kehm Counsel for Appellant: Dave Senkel Counsel for Respondent: Alan Freed Opinion Summary: Joanne Brown (Appellant) appeals from the trial court's judgment of dissolution of marriage in accordance with the parties' property settlement and separation agreement. APPEAL DISMISSED. Division Five holds: This Court lacks jurisdiction to consider Appellant's appeal, because her notice of appeal was untimely. Citation: Opinion Author: Glenn A. Norton, C.J. Opinion Vote: APPEAL DISMISSED. Crane, J. and Shaw, J., Concur. Opinion: Joanne Brown (Appellant) appeals from the trial court's judgment of dissolution of marriage in accordance with the parties' property settlement and separation agreement. Because her notice of appeal to this Court is untimely, her
appeal is dismissed. Under Rule 81.04(a), the notice of appeal must be filed no later than ten (10) days after the judgment becomes final. If a party files a timely authorized after-trial motion, the judgment becomes final at the expiration of ninety (90) days after the filing of the motion or, if such motion is passed on at an earlier date, at the later of: (1) thirty (30) days after the entry of judgment; or (2) disposition of the motion. Rule 81.05(a)(2). However, if no authorized after-trial motion is timely filed, the judgment becomes final thirty (30) days after the entry of the judgment. Rule 81.05(a)(1). Here, the circuit court entered its judgment on May 16, 2005. Appellant filed a motion to vacate, reopen, correct, amend or modify the judgment on June 16, 2005. However, this motion was untimely, because it was not filed within 30 days of the entry of judgment. Rule 78.04; Rule 44.01(a). Therefore, the judgment in question became final on June 15, 2005, and the notice of appeal was due ten days later, on Monday, June 27, 2005. Rule 81.04(a); Rule 44.01(a). Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on September 29, 2005, and it is untimely. When a notice of appeal is untimely filed, this court is without jurisdiction and must dismiss the appeal. Budd v. Budd, 157 S.W.3d 229, 230 (Mo. App. E.D. 2004). This Court issued an order directing Appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed. Appellant has not filed a response. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Related Opinions
Rodney Lee Lincoln, Appellant, vs. State of Missouri, Respondent.(2014)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictDecember 2, 2104#ED100987
State of Missouri, Respondent, v. James McGregory, Appellant.(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictMarch 10, 2026#ED113080
McGregory appealed his convictions for domestic assault in the third degree and property damage in the second degree, raising unpreserved claims of error regarding evidence admissibility and the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund judgment amount. The court affirmed the convictions but modified the CVC judgment amount, finding the trial court entered a judgment in excess of that authorized by law.
STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent v. RUSSELL KENNETH CLANCY, Appellant(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictFebruary 25, 2026#SD38782
The court affirmed Clancy's conviction for second-degree assault against a special victim after a jury trial. The evidence was sufficient to prove that Clancy punched an elderly civilian in the face and struck a police officer during an altercation at a laundromat, supporting the conviction under Missouri statute § 565.052.3.
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. James Willis Peters, Appellant.(2026)
Supreme Court of MissouriFebruary 24, 2026#SC101218
James Willis Peters appealed his conviction for driving while intoxicated as a chronic offender, challenging whether the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that all four of his prior offenses were intoxication-related traffic offenses. The court found the state failed to sufficiently prove his 2002 offense was an IRTO and therefore vacated the judgment and remanded for resentencing.
State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Gerald R. Nytes, Appellant.(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED113261
Gerald Nytes appealed his conviction for violating a full order of protection, arguing the State failed to prove he had notice of the order as required by statute. The court affirmed, finding sufficient evidence of notice based on Nytes's presence at the contested order of protection hearing and his subsequent violation through phone calls made from jail to the protected party.