State ex rel. Douglas Sharp, et al., Relators, v. Honorable Kenneth M. Romines, Judge, Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri, Div. 10, Respondent.
Decision date: Unknown
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
Case Style: State ex rel. Douglas Sharp, et al., Relators, v. Honorable Kenneth M. Romines, Judge, Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri, Div. 10, Respondent. Case Number: 81020 Handdown Date: 02/09/1999 Appeal From: Original Proceeding in Prohibition Counsel for Appellant: Robert Herman Counsel for Respondent: William F. Arnet, Marvin E. Wright and Phillip J. Hoskins Opinion Summary: The respondent judge found that venue for this suit against the University of Missouri was proper in St. Louis County, where it was filed, but transferred it to Boone County concluding St. Louis County was not a convenient forum. PRELIMINARY ORDER MADE PERMANENT. Court en banc holds: Having found St. Louis County was a proper venue, the court cannot transfer the case to another county based on the doctrine of an inconvenient forum. Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: PRELIMINARY ORDER MADE PERMANENT. Benton, C.J., Limbaugh, Covington, White and Wolff, JJ., and Barney and Karohl, Sp.JJ., concur. Price and Holstein, JJ., not participating. Opinion: Relators filed a class action in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County. The petition asserts that the University of Missouri has charged tuition in violation of section 172.360, RSMo. A declaratory judgment, injunctive relief and refunds are the relief sought. The University of Missouri filed a motion asserting venue was improper in the city of St. Louis. The respondent judge found that venue was proper in St. Louis County but that St. Louis County was not a convenient forum
for the suit. He, therefore, ordered the case transferred to Boone County. Relators seek a writ from this Court prohibiting the transfer of this case to Boone County. Missouri's venue statutes do not permit an intrastate application of the doctrine of inconvenient forum. Anglim v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 832 S.W.2d 298, 302 (Mo. banc 1992). "The statutory designation of proper venue as the site where the cause of action accrued presupposes legislative determination that it cannot be overly inconvenient for a defendant to appear in that location." Willman v. McMillen, 779 S.W.2d 583, 586 (Mo. banc 1989). Having found that the defendant in the underlying cause is subject to venue in St. Louis County, the respondent was not permitted to order the case transferred to another county on the basis of forum non conveniens. The preliminary order in prohibition is made permanent. 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.