OTT LAW

Travis Bastain and Celestine Bastain, Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. Thomas E. Brown, Defendant/Appellant, and Gloria J. Brown, Defendant.

Decision date: UnknownED77460

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: Travis Bastain and Celestine Bastain, Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. Thomas E. Brown, Defendant/Appellant, and Gloria J. Brown, Defendant. Case Number: ED77460 Handdown Date: 10/10/2000 Appeal From: Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Hon. James P. Williams Counsel for Appellant: Party Acting Pro Se Counsel for Respondent: Parties Acting Pro Se Opinion Summary: Defendant appeals from the judgment entered by the circuit court against him after a trial de novo on a small claims action. DISMISSED. Division Five holds: Defendant has failed to file a transcript of the proceedings from the trial de novo in violation of Rule 81.12(c). Without the transcript, there is nothing before this court for appellate review. Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: DISMISSED. Hoff, C.J., Knaup Crane and Sullivan, JJ., concur. Opinion: Defendant, Thomas E. Brown,(FN1) appeals pro se from the judgment entered by the circuit court against him after a trial de novo on a small claims action brought by plaintiffs Travis Bastain and Celestine Bastain. On appeal, defendant challenges the trial court's failure to consider certain evidence adduced at trial. We dismiss the appeal on the ground that the record on appeal is insufficient under Rule 81.12(a) to review the appeal, because defendant failed to file a transcript of the trial de novo.

Rule 81.12(a) provides that the record on appeal shall contain all of the record, proceedings and evidence necessary to the determination of all questions to be presented. Environmental Quality Research, Inc. v. Mercantile Trust Nat'l Ass'n, 854 S.W.2d 500, 501 (Mo. App. 1993). This rule requires an appellant to file a transcript and prepare a legal file so that the record contains all the evidence necessary for a determination of questions presented to the appellate court for a decision. Id. In the absence of the required record, there is nothing for us to review. Lake Tishomingo Property Owners v. Klein, 872 S.W.2d 569, 570 (Mo. App. 1994). Defendant has not filed a copy of the transcript from the trial de novo proceedings. The legal file contains a minute entry dated October 4, 1999 which shows that the trial de novo was recorded by sound recording. Parties proceeding pro se are bound by the same rules as lawyers. Coyne v. Coyne, 17 S.W.3d 904, 905-06 (Mo. App. 2000); Snelling v. Stephenson, 747 S.W.2d 689, 690 (Mo. App. 1988). Without a transcript of the proceedings, we cannot assess the errors alleged. Appeal dismissed. Footnotes: FN1. Defendant Gloria Brown did not request or obtain leave to file a late notice of appeal. Because he is not a licensed attorney, Thomas Brown may not act on behalf of Gloria Brown in this court. 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