512.180. Appeals from cases tried before associate circuit judge. — 1. Any person aggrieved by a judgment in a civil case tried without a jury before an associate circuit judge, other than an associate circuit judge sitting in the probate division or who has been assigned to hear the case on the record under procedures applicable before circuit judges, shall have the right of a trial de novo in all cases tried before municipal court or under the provisions of chapter 482 or 535.
2. In all other contested civil cases tried with or without a jury before an associate circuit judge or on assignment under such procedures applicable before circuit judges or in any misdemeanor case or county ordinance violation case a record shall be kept, and any person aggrieved by a judgment rendered in any such case may have an appeal upon that record to the appropriate appellate court. At the discretion of the judge, but in compliance with the rules of the Supreme Court, the record may be a stenographic record or one made by the utilization of electronic, magnetic, or mechanical sound or video recording devices.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
102
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1958–2022 · leading case:
Farinella v. Croft, 922 S.W.2d 755 (Mo. 1996).
Farinella v. Croft, 922 S.W.2d 755 (Mo. 1996).
· cites it 24× “§ 512.180, RSMo 1969. With court reform in 1978, magistrate courts were abolished and duties of that court were assigned to associate circuit judges.”
Fannie Mae v. My Quang Truong, 361 S.W.3d 400 (Mo. 2012).
· cites it 12× “" Section 512.180 governs the relief available to a party aggrieved by a judgment in a civil case tried before an associate circuit judge and provides two forms of relief.”
Weston Point Resort Condo. Owners'ass'n, Inc. v. Floro, 796 S.W.2d 928 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 24× “The issue in this case is the interpretation or application of § 512.180, RSMo 1986, and specifically, whether or not the Circuit Court of Camden County, Missouri, had jurisdiction to hear defendants’ case de novo.”
Watters v. Travel Guard Int'l, 136 S.W.3d 100 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 5× “Travel Guard has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction, contending this Court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal because it involves a judgment of an associate circuit court in a case involving less than $3,000 in claimed damages.”
Ground Freight Expeditors, LLC v. Binder, 359 S.W.3d 123 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 14× “On July 26, 2010, the Binders filed an application for trial de novo pursuant to section 512.180 3 in the circuit court of Clay County, Missouri “for the purpose of seeking review in the Circuit Court of the denial” of the Binders’ motion to set aside default judgment.”
State v. Carter, 202 S.W.3d 700 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 13× “” Although we have neither Carter’s application nor the State’s response before us, the transcript of this hearing reveals that Carter’s “Application for a Trial De Novo” was based on his claim that section 512.180, RSMo Cum.Supp.2004, afforded him the statutory right to a trial…”
Thorpe v. Meier, 755 S.W.2d 683 (Mo. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 14× “does not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal of [a judgment in] an unlawful detainer action heard by an associate circuit judge, without assignment, under section 512.180, RSMo [Cum.Supp.] 1984, in effect until December 31, 1986, in that [defendants’] only remedy was to request…”
Walker v. Brownel, 375 S.W.3d 259 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 6× “” Within chapter 512, Section 512.180 controls appeals from civil cases tried before an associate circuit judge and, depending upon the action of the underlying case, the statute sets out the aggrieved party’s avenues of redress.”
Davis v. Oaks, 942 S.W.2d 464 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 9× “Oaks was not entitled to a trial de novo following the associate circuit court judgment *466 under § 512.180, RSMo 1994. 1 She argues that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction over the matter, which renders moot the issues raised by Mr.”
Essner v. Reynolds, 621 S.W.2d 551 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 9× “” Section 512.180, RSMo 1978, entitled “Appeals from cases tried before associate circuit judges,” provides: “1.”
Tittsworth v. Chaffin, 741 S.W.2d 314 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 5× “Our holding is consistent with earlier cases construing § 512.180, RSMo 1969, which authorized trial de novo appeals from a “judgment” of a magistrate court.”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 512.180(1) — 7 cases
Weston Point Resort Condo. Owners'ass'n, Inc. v. Floro, 796 S.W.2d 928 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).
“The issue in this case is the interpretation or application of § 512.180, RSMo 1986, and specifically, whether or not the Circuit Court of Camden County, Missouri, had jurisdiction to hear defendants’ case de novo.”
Essner v. Reynolds, 621 S.W.2d 551 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981).
“” Section 512.180, RSMo 1978, entitled “Appeals from cases tried before associate circuit judges,” provides: “1.”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 512.180(2) — 3 cases
Weston Point Resort Condo. Owners'ass'n, Inc. v. Floro, 796 S.W.2d 928 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).
“The issue in this case is the interpretation or application of § 512.180, RSMo 1986, and specifically, whether or not the Circuit Court of Camden County, Missouri, had jurisdiction to hear defendants’ case de novo.”
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.