Ott Law Firm

Helujon Ltd., Appellant, v. Isle of Capri of Jefferson County, et al., Respondents.

Decision date: UnknownED80724

Parties & Roles

Appellant
Helujon Ltd.

Disposition

Dismissed

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.

Related Legal Help

Researching a similar real estate issue?

This archive page is for legal research. For a practical overview of claims, deadlines, evidence, and next steps, start with the related practice page.

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: Helujon Ltd., Appellant, v. Isle of Capri of Jefferson County, et al., Respondents. Case Number: ED80724 Handdown Date: 10/29/2002 Appeal From: Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Hon. Paul McGhee Counsel for Appellant: Mary B. Schultz Counsel for Respondent: Dana Hockensmith and Paul C. Hamil Opinion Summary: Helujon, Ltd., appeals the judgment in a court-tried case granting Kimmswick Properties, Inc., a prescriptive easement over Helujon's property and denying Helujon's claim for trespass and money damages against Kimmswick Properties, Essex Contracting, Inc., and Martin Toma. DISMISSED. Division Five holds: The judgment is not final because it does not contain a description of the location, direction and width of the roadway easement granted to Kimmswick Properties. Citation: Opinion Author: Lawrence G. Crahan, Judge Opinion Vote: DISMISSED. Mooney, C.J., and Hoff, J., concur. Opinion: Helujon, Ltd. ("Helujon") appeals the judgment in a court-tried case granting Kimmswick Properties, Inc. ("Kimmswick Properties") a prescriptive easement over Helujon's property and denying Helujon's claim for trespass and money damages against Kimmswick Properties, Essex Contracting, Inc. ("Essex") and Martin Toma. We dismiss the appeal for lack of a final judgment. The trial court's judgment in this case included the legal descriptions of the properties affected by the prescriptive

easement. However, the judgment omitted any description of the road which is the subject of the easement. A judgment that requires external proof to dispose of disputed issues is not final for Rule 74.01(b) purposes. Trust by Sherman v. Wilson, 928 S.W.2d 897, 898 (Mo. App. 1996). A judgment granting a roadway easement must describe the location, direction and width of the easement with enough certainty to support a subsequent conveyance of the property. Id. The decree should be in a form so that it alone will be suitable for recording in real estate records. Underwood v. Daniele, 2002 Mo. App. LEXIS 1499, *3 (Mo. App. 2002). A judgment that fails to adequately describe the property invites the possibility of future adjudication regarding the scope and location of the property affected by the judgment and necessitates proof from an external source. Id. Such a judgment lacks finality and is not reviewable by an appellate court. Id. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.

Authorities Cited

Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.

Rules

Cases

Related Opinions

Other opinions in the same practice area.

PAUL METZGER, and JACQUELINE METZGER, Respondents v. WAYNE MORELOCK, and KATHY MORELOCK, Appellants(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictMarch 12, 2026#SD38930

affirmed

The trial court granted summary judgment to the Metzgers on their claim for a prescriptive easement over a portion of a paved driveway between their home and the Morelocks' property. The appellate court affirmed the grant of summary judgment, finding no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Real EstateCivil Litigationper_curiam1,904 words
Read opinion

The court affirmed the circuit court's judgment in favor of the Rosenbohms on their adverse possession and trespass claims against Stiens regarding disputed tracts of property in Nodaway County. The court rejected Stiens's arguments regarding excluded evidence, cross-examination, jury instructions on permissive use defense, and remanded the case for the court to amend the judgment with precise legal descriptions of the disputed property.

Read opinion

Arthur F. Daume, Jr., and Gayle C. Daume, Appellants, v. Thomas Szepanksi, et al., Respondents.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 3, 2026#ED113073

reversed

In this quiet title appeal, the court reversed the trial court's interpretation of an easement deed that the Daumes held over a private roadway. The court rejected the trial court's constructions that the easement's 'non-commercial purposes' limitation prohibited agricultural use and that it was restricted to the Daumes and their immediate family members.

Read opinion

The Missouri Supreme Court reversed the circuit court's judgment and held that a 2022 statute prohibiting homeowners' associations from banning solar panel installations applies to preexisting covenants, not just prospective ones. The homeowners' challenge to the HOA's restriction on solar panels visible from the street was successful, as the statute's prohibitions supersede prior restrictive covenants.

Read opinion