Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 510.310 (2026)

Procedure in cases tried upon facts without a jury

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

  510.310.  Procedure in cases tried upon facts without a jury. — 1.  In cases tried upon the facts without a jury, the court shall rule upon all objections to evidence as in jury cases.  Where the court is of the opinion that the evidence is not admissible, it shall not receive the evidence, but where the evidence is brief and is not privileged, the court shall permit the same and any cross-examination relating thereto or evidence in rebuttal thereof to be taken down by the court reporter or otherwise preserved, apart from the evidence received.

  2.  At or after the trial, the court shall render such judgment as it thinks right upon the law and the evidence.  If any party shall so request before final submission of the case, the court shall dictate to the court reporter, or prepare and file a brief opinion containing a statement of the grounds for its decision and the method of determining any damages awarded; and may, or if specifically requested by counsel, shall, include its findings on any of the principal controverted fact issues.  All fact issues upon which no specific findings are made shall be deemed found in accordance with the result reached.

  3.  Upon motion of a party made not later than ten days after entry of judgment the court may amend the judgment and opinion.  The motion may be made with a motion for a new trial.

  4.  No findings of fact, except such as shall have been specifically requested, and no conclusions of law or objections to the judgment or to the opinion of the court are necessary for purposes of review.  The question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment may be raised whether or not the question was raised in the trial court.  The appellate court shall review the case upon both the law and the evidence as in suits of an equitable nature.  The judgment shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge of the credibility of the witnesses.  The appellate court shall consider any evidence which was rejected by the trial court and duly preserved for the appeal when the appellate court believes such evidence to be admissible.  The appellate court may also order any rejected evidence to be taken by deposition or under a reference and returned to said court.

­­--------

(L. 1943 p. 353 § 114)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 366 cases, 1951–2019 · leading case: White v. Dir. of Revenue, 321 S.W.3d 298 (Mo. 2010).
White v. Dir. of Revenue, 321 S.W.3d 298 (Mo. 2010). · cites it 8× “Similarly, section 510.310 provides that a party may request written findings, but written findings are not required for appellate review of court-tried cases.”
In re the Marriage of Thomas Leon Harris & Melanie Berlier Harris THOMAS LEON HARRIS v. MELANIE BERLIER HARRIS, Respondent-Respondent., 446 S.W.3d 320 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 11× “” Section 510.310, RSMo 2000. The distinction between these competing statements is found in the caselaw supporting the decision in Brown.”
Land Clearance for Redevelopment Auth. v. Zitko, 386 S.W.2d 69 (Mo. 1964). · cites it 10× “01(b) and (d) and § 510.310, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S. It is not necessary to discuss in detail the seven specifications because both the rule and the statute provide that: "All fact issues upon which no specific findings are made shall be deemed found in accordance with the result…”
Schmitt v. Pierce, 344 S.W.2d 120 (Mo. 1961). · cites it 8× “It is our duty to review jury waived cases "upon both the law and the evidence as in suits of an equitable nature.”
Leggett v. Missouri State Life Ins. Co., 342 S.W.2d 833 (Mo. 1960). · cites it 5× “Section 510.310 RSMo 1949, V.A. M.S., enacted in 1943, Laws of Missouri 1943, p.”
Jo B. Gardner, Inc. v. Beanland, 611 S.W.2d 317 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 5× “-310 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S. constitutes reversible error.”
Abeles v. Wurdack, 285 S.W.2d 544 (Mo. 1955). · cites it 6× “Section 510.310, RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S., does not by its terms prohibit a trial court from voluntarily making a statement of the grounds for its decision and findings on the principal controverted fact issues.”
Wilson v. White, 272 S.W.2d 1 (Mo. Ct. App. 1954). · cites it 8× “” Section 510.310(2); Decker v. Evans, Mo., 221 S.”
Beckemeier v. Baessler, 270 S.W.2d 782 (Mo. 1954). · cites it 6× “” Section 510.310 subd. 4; Scott v. Kempland, Mo.”
Witte v. Cooke Tractor Co., 261 S.W.2d 651 (Mo. Ct. App. 1953). · cites it 7× “The requirement of the statute in this regard is mandatory, and it is the duty of the trial court in a civil case tried upon the facts without a jury, upon request, to make a written statement of the grounds for its decision, and to include its findings on any of the principal…”
Conran v. Girvin, 341 S.W.2d 75 (Mo. 1960). · cites it 6× “Section 510.310, subd. 4 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.”
Emerson v. Treadway, 270 S.W.2d 614 (Mo. Ct. App. 1954). · cites it 6× “Plaintiff also concedes liability for item 15; and, although sharply contested upon trial, item 29 is no longer in controversy. This cause having been tried by the court, sitting as a jury, it is our duty to “review the case upon both the law and the evidence as in suits of an…”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 510.310(2) — 22 cases
In re Marriage of J_ H_ M, 544 S.W.2d 582 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976).
Gover v. Cleveland, 299 S.W.2d 239 (Mo. Ct. App. 1957).
Maas v. Dreckshage, 244 S.W.2d 397 (Mo. Ct. App. 1951).
Grapette Co. v. Grapette Bottling Co., 286 S.W.2d 34 (Mo. Ct. App. 1956).
Lange v. Baker, 377 S.W.2d 5 (Mo. Ct. App. 1964).
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 510.310(3) — 2 cases
Anderson v. Curls, 309 S.W.2d 692 (Mo. Ct. App. 1958).
Long v. Stilwell Homes, Inc., 333 S.W.2d 103 (Mo. Ct. App. 1960).
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 510.310(4) — 78 cases
Emerson v. Treadway, 270 S.W.2d 614 (Mo. Ct. App. 1954). “Plaintiff also concedes liability for item 15; and, although sharply contested upon trial, item 29 is no longer in controversy. This cause having been tried by the court, sitting as a jury, it is our duty to “review the case upon both the law and the evidence as in suits of an…”
Wilson v. White, 272 S.W.2d 1 (Mo. Ct. App. 1954). “” Section 510.310(2); Decker v. Evans, Mo., 221 S.”
Wyler Watch Agency, Inc. v. Hooker, 280 S.W.2d 849 (Mo. Ct. App. 1955).
EC Robinson Lumber Co. v. Lowrey, 276 S.W.2d 636 (Mo. Ct. App. 1955).
Cmty. Land Corp. v. Stuenkel, 436 S.W.2d 11 (Mo. 1968).
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 510.310(d) — 1 case
Schertz v. Blocher, 288 S.W.2d 385 (Mo. Ct. App. 1956).
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.