Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Kohner Props., Inc. v. Johnson, 553 S.W.3d 280 (2018)

Citation
Kohner Props., Inc. v. Johnson, 553 S.W.3d 280 (2018)
Parent Document
Kohner Props., Inc. v. Johnson, 553 S.W.3d 280 (2018)
Jurisdiction
Missouri (state)
Effective Date
2018-07-03

Other Sections in This Document (45)

Full Text

876 chars
It is unclear whether Johnson is claiming the circuit court erroneously declared the law or erroneously applied the law. "[A]llegations of error not briefed or not properly briefed shall not be considered in any civil appeal." Rule 84.13(a). Nowhere in her substitute brief does Johnson expressly say the circuit court erroneously declared or applied the law. This alone suggests Johnson's contention against the in custodia legis procedure is "technically deficient" and thus not preserved for review in this Court. Wilkerson v. Prelutsky , 943 S.W.2d 643, 647 (Mo. banc 1997). But this Court may "treat the point as preserved for appellate review" if it "provides sufficient notice to the parties and to this Court as to the issues presented on appeal." Id. Here, the Court is on notice of the issue presented on appeal and the briefing suggests Kohner is on notice as well.