Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)

Citation
Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
Parent Document
Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
Jurisdiction
Missouri (state)
Effective Date
1986-04-08

Full Text

1,488 chars
This Court has recently held that the unlawful detainer statute is an exclusive and special code to which the ordinary rules and proceedings of other civil actions do not apply. Lake of the Woods Apartments v. Carson, 651 S.W.2d 556, 558 (Mo.App.1983); McIlvain v. Kavorinos, 358 Mo. 1153, 1157, 219 S.W.2d 349, 351, (banc 1949). The sole issue in an unlawful de-tainer action is the immediate right of possession. Carson, supra, at 558; F.A. Sander Real Estate and Investment Company v. Warner, 205 S.W.2d 283, 288 (Mo.App.1947). Issues relating to title or matters of equity, such as mistake, estoppel and waiver cannot be interposed as a defense. Carson, supra, at 558; Drzewiecki v. Stock-Daniel Hardware Co., 293 S.W. 441, 444 (Mo.App.1927). It is generally held that counterclaims are also prohibited in unlawful detainer proceedings, regardless of the subject matter, unless permitted by statute. Carson, supra, at 558; Wilson v. Teale, 88 S.W.2d 422, 423 (Mo.App.1935). Missouri statutes do not so permit. Carson, supra, at 558. Defendants’ argument ignores the special summary nature of unlawful detainer proceedings. Carson, supra, at 558. Action for unlawful detain-*392er is a possessory action only, and mere equitable rights or interests which defendants think themselves entitled to cannot be set up therein. Porter v. Gibbs, 242 S.W. 1016, 1017 (Mo.App.1915). To permit defendants to assert an equitable defense would defeat the purpose behind an unlawful detainer action.