OTT LAW

State of Missouri, Department of Social Services, Family Support Division, Plaintiff/Appellant and Adrienne M. Anderson n/k/a Jordan, Plaintiff, v. Gregory L. Anderson, Defendant/Respondent.

Decision date: UnknownED89624

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: State of Missouri, Department of Social Services, Family Support Division, Plaintiff/Appellant and Adrienne M. Anderson n/k/a Jordan, Plaintiff, v. Gregory L. Anderson, Defendant/Respondent. Case Number: ED89624 Handdown Date: 06/29/2007 Appeal From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. Dennis Neil Smith Counsel for Appellant: Rebecca Holt Kuether, Andrienne Anderson, Pro Se Counsel for Respondent: Gregory Louis Anderson, Pro Se Opinion Summary: State of Missouri, Department of Social Services, Family Support Division, appeals from the trial court denying its motion to review and approve a proposed modification of a judicial order. The division moved to review and approve a proposed modification of a judicial order, which would have modified the amount of child support owed by Gregory Anderson. The trial court wrote "denied" on the proposed modification and then signed and dated its denial. DISMISSED. Division Five holds: Because the trial court's writing on motion that it was "denied" is not denominated a judgment as required by Rule 74.01(a), we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Citation: Opinion Author: Booker T. Shaw, Chief Judge Opinion Vote: APPEAL DISMISSED. Norton, J. and Cohen, J., Opinion:

State of Missouri, Department of Social Services, Family Support Division (Appellant) appeals from an order denying its motion to review and approve a proposed modification of a judicial order. The appeal is dismissed. This Court has an obligation to determine sua sponte whether it has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal, and if we lack jurisdiction, we should dismiss the appeal. Bryant v. City of University City, 105 S.W.3d 855, 856 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003). In a civil case, a judgment must be expressly denominated "judgment" or "decree" to be appealable. Rule 74.01(a); Williams v. Imperial Homes, Inc., 169 S.W.3d 554, 555 (Mo. App. E.D. 2005). In designating the writing a "judgment," it must be clear from the writing that the trial court is calling the document or docket sheet entry a judgment. City of St. Louis v. Hughes, 950 S.W.2d 850, 853 (Mo. banc 1997). Here, Appellant filed a motion to review and approve a proposed modification of a judicial order, which would modify the amount of child support owed by Gregory Anderson (Respondent). The trial court wrote, "Denied" on the proposed modification and then signed and dated its denial. This denial is not denominated a judgment as required by Rule 74.01(a). We issued an order directing Appellant to show cause why its appeal should not be dismissed and providing Appellant an opportunity to ask the circuit court to enter a judgment that complied with Rule 74.01(a). Appellant has failed to respond to our order and has not filed a judgment complying with Rule 74.01(a). We dismiss the appeal without prejudice for lack of a final, appealable judgment. 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

affirmed
criminal-lawmajority4,922 words

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. James McGregory, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictMarch 10, 2026#ED113080

affirmed

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.

criminal-lawper_curiam3,374 words

STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent v. RUSSELL KENNETH CLANCY, Appellant(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictFebruary 25, 2026#SD38782

affirmed

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.

criminal-lawper_curiam1,516 words

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. James Willis Peters, Appellant.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriFebruary 24, 2026#SC101218

remanded

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.

criminal-lawper_curiam3,993 words

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Gerald R. Nytes, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED113261

affirmed

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.

criminal-lawper_curiam1,603 words