Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 435.355 (2026)

Proceedings to compel or stay arbitration

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  435.355.  Proceedings to compel or stay arbitration. — 1.  On application of a party showing an agreement described in section 435.350, and the opposing party's refusal to arbitrate, the court shall order the parties to proceed with arbitration, but if the opposing party denies the existence of the agreement to arbitrate, the court shall proceed summarily to the determination of the issue so raised and shall order arbitration if found for the moving party; otherwise, the application shall be denied.

  2.  On application, the court may stay an arbitration proceeding commenced or threatened on a showing that there is no agreement to arbitrate.  Such an issue, when in substantial and bona fide dispute, shall be forthwith and summarily tried and the stay ordered if found for the moving party.  If found for the opposing party, the court shall order the parties to proceed to arbitration.

  3.  If an issue referable to arbitration under the alleged agreement is involved in action or proceeding pending in a court having jurisdiction to hear applications under subsection 1 of this section, the application shall be made therein.  Otherwise and subject to section 435.435, the application may be made in any court of competent jurisdiction.

  4.  Any action or proceeding involving an issue subject to arbitration shall be stayed if an order for arbitration or an application therefor has been made under this section or, if the issue is severable, the stay may be with respect thereto only.  When the application is made in such action or proceeding, the order for arbitration shall include such stay.

  5.  An order for arbitration shall not be refused on the ground that the claim in issue lacks merit or bona fides or because any fault or grounds for the claim sought to be arbitrated have not been shown.

­­--------

(L. 1980 H.B. 1203 § 2)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 85 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case: Nitro Distrib., Inc. v. Dunn, 194 S.W.3d 339 (Mo. 2006).
Nitro Distrib., Inc. v. Dunn, 194 S.W.3d 339 (Mo. 2006). · cites it 8× “Appellants, on the other hand, argue that the issues should be determined only in a summary proceeding, as specified in section 435.355(1). As Nitro correctly observes, the FAA unambiguously provides for a jury trial when factual disputes arise in federal courts regarding the…”
Kunzie v. Jack-In-The-Box, Inc., 330 S.W.3d 476 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 10× “Section 435.355(1), RSMo 2000 (emphasis added).”
Netco, Inc. v. Dunn, 194 S.W.3d 353 (Mo. 2006). · cites it 8× “Appellants, on the other hand, argue that the issues should be determined only in a summary proceeding, as specified in section 435.355(1). As Netco correctly observes, the FAA unambiguously provides for a jury trial when factual disputes arise in federal courts regarding the…”
Carla Baker v. Bristol Care, Inc., d/b/a Bristol Manor, & David Furnell, 450 S.W.3d 770 (Mo. 2014). · cites it 4× “440, RSMo 2000, 2 provides that an appeal may be taken from an order denying an application to compel arbitration made under section 435.355. The order denying Bristol’s motion to compel arbitration is appealable.”
Mueller v. Hopkins & Howard, PC, 5 S.W.3d 182 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 9× “460, RSMo (1994) and because employer did not apply for arbitration under section 435.355, RSMo (1994). 3 The FAA permits an appeal from an order refusing a stay of litigation or an order denying a petition to order arbitration.”
State ex rel. Todd Hewitt, Relator v. Honorable Kristine Kerr, Judge, Circuit Court for St. Louis Cnty., Missouri, 461 S.W.3d 798 (Mo. 2015). · cites it 3× “See §§ 435.355, 435.435. However, when a circuit court concludes there is a valid arbitration agreement, the statutes make clear that the time for review by appellate courts is after the arbitration takes place, at the end of the circuit court proceedings.”
St. Luke's Hosp. v. Midwest Mech. Contractors, Inc., 681 S.W.2d 482 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 14× “This is an appeal from a circuit court judgment in the form of an order of a temporary stay of arbitration pursuant to § 435.355, RSMo 1978. The judgment is affirmed.”
Jackson Cnty. v. McClain Enter., Inc., 190 S.W.3d 633 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “If the trial court finds that Judge Moran’s service as an arbitrator was not an essential term, an enforceable arbitration agreement exists, and the court, in accordance with section 435.355, will order arbitration, appoint an arbitrator, and dismiss Jackson *641 County’s suit…”
W. Waterproofing Co. v. Lindenwood Colleges, 662 S.W.2d 288 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 6× “370, as to prejudice substantially the rights of a party; or (5)There was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined in proceedings under section 435.355 and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection.”
Matthew Alexander Nicholson & Jailyn Marchai Nicholson, Plaintiffs-respondents v. Surrey Vacation Resorts, Inc., 463 S.W.3d 358 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “440 provides that an appeal may be taken from an order denying an application to compel arbitration made under section 435.355. 2 The Nicholsons contend, based on this language, that Surrey’s appeal should have been taken following the trial court’s dismissal of all pending…”
Vill. of Cairo v. Bodine Contracting Co., 685 S.W.2d 253 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “[Subsections 1 and 2 of § 435.355 compared with §§ 2 and 3 of 9 U.”
State ex rel. Greitens v. Am. Tobacco Co., 509 S.W.3d 726 (Mo. 2017). · cites it 2× “370, as to prejudice substantially the rights of a party; or (5) There was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined in proceedings pursuant to section 435.355 and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection;…”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 435.355(1) — 5 cases
Nitro Distrib., Inc. v. Dunn, 194 S.W.3d 339 (Mo. 2006). “Appellants, on the other hand, argue that the issues should be determined only in a summary proceeding, as specified in section 435.355(1). As Nitro correctly observes, the FAA unambiguously provides for a jury trial when factual disputes arise in federal courts regarding the…”
Kunzie v. Jack-In-The-Box, Inc., 330 S.W.3d 476 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). “Section 435.355(1), RSMo 2000 (emphasis added).”
Netco, Inc. v. Dunn, 194 S.W.3d 353 (Mo. 2006). “Appellants, on the other hand, argue that the issues should be determined only in a summary proceeding, as specified in section 435.355(1). As Netco correctly observes, the FAA unambiguously provides for a jury trial when factual disputes arise in federal courts regarding the…”
Sennett v. Nat'l Healthcare Corp., 272 S.W.3d 237 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 435.355(4) — 1 case
State Ex Rel. St. Joseph Light & Power Co. v. Donelson, 631 S.W.2d 887 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.