John K. Latta vs. John Mahn, and Lisa Lindsey
Decision date: UnknownWD78051
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
JOHN K. LATTA, Respondent,
v.
JOHN MAHN, and LISA LINDSEY, Appellants. ) ) ) ) ) ) )
WD78051
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jackson County The Honorable Jalilah Otto, Judge
Before Division Four: Alok Ahuja, C.J., and Thomas H. Newton and James E. Welsh, JJ.
John Mahn and Lisa Lindsey appeal from a default judgment entered against them and in favor of Respondent John Latta. The judgment awarded Latta immediate possession of a rental property located in Kansas City. Because the default judgment is not itself appealable, we dismiss Mahn and Lindsey's appeal. On September 12, 2014, Latta filed a petition against Mahn and Lindsey for possession of rental property located at 3807 Kings Highway in Kansas City. Latta alleged that rent had not been paid by tenants Mahn and Lindsey in the amount of $2425.00. A hearing took place on October 9, 2014. Latta appeared in person, but Mahn and Lindsey did not appear. The circuit court entered a default judgment against them on the same date. Mahn and Lindsey never filed a motion to set aside the default judgment in the circuit court, but instead filed a notice of appeal to this Court on October 17, 2014.
2 "The right of appeal is purely statutory. Without statutory authority, no right to appeal exists." AMG Franchises, Inc. v. Crack Team USA, Inc., 289 S.W.3d 655, 657 (Mo. App. E.D. 2009) (citations omitted). In particular, "[i]t is well settled that a party may not appeal a default judgment until [the party] has proceeded with a motion to set aside the judgment as provided under Rule 74.05(d) unless the appeal presents questions concerning the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction or the sufficiency of the plaintiff's petition." Tan-Tar-A Estates, L.L.C. v. Steiner, 465 S.W.3d 915, 917 (Mo. App. S.D. 2015) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also, e.g., Agnello v. Walker, 306 S.W.3d 666, 675-76 (Mo. App. W.D. 2010) ("The default judgment is subject to review only by appeal from the trial court's judgment denying [Appellant's] motion filed pursuant to Rule 74.05."). Mahn and Lindsey have not argued, nor has this court found any reason to believe, that the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction or that Latta's petition was insufficient. In these circumstances, "the direct appeal of the default judgment should be dismissed for failure to satisfy a mandatory prerequisite. A default judgment cannot be appealed unless the trial court has previously heard a motion to set aside or vacate the judgment." Barney v. Suggs, 688 S.W.2d 356, 358 (Mo. banc 1985) (citing Vonsmith v. Vonsmith, 666 S.W.2d 424 (Mo. banc 1984)). Conclusion The appeal is dismissed.
Alok Ahuja, Chief Judge All concur.
Related Opinions
PAUL METZGER, and JACQUELINE METZGER, Respondents v. WAYNE MORELOCK, and KATHY MORELOCK, Appellants(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictMarch 12, 2026#SD38930
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.
Kevin Rosenbohm, Trustee of the Kevin and Michele Rosenbohm Family Trust Dated July 1, 2011 and Matt Rosenbohm and Nick Rosenbohm vs. Gregory Stiens, and Gregory Stiens, Trustee of the Anthony Stiens Trust(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictMarch 3, 2026#WD87720
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.
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
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.
Colleen Eikmeier and William S. Love, Appellants, vs. Granite Springs Home Owners Association, Inc. A Missouri Not-For-Profit Corp., Respondent.(2026)
Supreme Court of MissouriJanuary 23, 2026#SC101161
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.
State of Missouri, ex rel., State Tax Commission vs. County Executive of Jackson County, Missouri, Assessor of Jackson County, Missouri, Jackson County Board of Equalization, through its Members in their Official Capacities, Clerk of the Jackson County, Missouri, Legislature(2025)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictDecember 30, 2025#WD87831