516.420. When not to apply to corporations. — None of the provisions of sections 516.380 to 516.420 shall apply to suits against moneyed corporations or against the directors or stockholders thereof, to recover any penalty or forfeiture imposed, or to enforce any liability created by the act of incorporation or any other law; but all such suits shall be brought within six years after the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts upon which such penalty or forfeiture attached, or by which such liability was created.
Notes of Decisions
Schwartz v. Bann-Cor Mortg., 197 S.W.3d 168 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 50× “The issues in this appeal include the question of whether the six-year limitations period of Section 516.420, RSMo, 2000 applies to claims brought under the Second Mortgage Loan Act against Bann-Cor, a company engaged in the business of making second mortgage loans.”
Glen v. Fairway Indep. Mortg. Corp., 265 F.R.D. 474 (E.D. Mo. 2010).
· cites it 13× “” Yet the only “reasons” given are that plaintiffs believe that Missouri’s six-year statute of limitations for claims against “moneyed corporations,” Mo.Rev.Stat. § 516.420, applies to their class claim, and that their claim should relate back to the filing of their first…”
Jerry Washington v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 747 F.3d 955 (8th Cir. 2014).
· cites it 3× “The Washing-tons appeal, invoking the six-year statute of limitations of § 516.420 RSMo or, alternatively, the application of the “continuing or repeated wrong” exception.”
Wong v. Bann-Cor Mortg., 878 F. Supp. 2d 989 (W.D. Mo. 2012).
· cites it 6× “we agree with Borrowers that Borrowers’ claims against the assignee defendants are not foreclosed by [§ 516.420 RSMo.]”)). In other words, plaintiffs argue that their claims all defendants, regardless of when they were named in a complaint, should be deemed timely just because…”
Wong v. Mortg., 918 F. Supp. 2d 941 (W.D. Mo. 2013).
· cites it 7× “§ 516.420 applied to the MSMLA claims. Schwartz v.”
Jenkins & Assocs., Inc. v. Quick Elec., Inc., 971 S.W.2d 867 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).
“However, the trial court also found that the State’s claims in this ease were time-barred by § 516.420. Due to the State’s inability to pursue any claims against Jenkins or Quick for violation of § 290.”
Sonderegger v. Specialized Loan Servicing LLC (E.D. Mo. 2022).
· cites it 3× “2018) (finding that MSMLA claims are subject to the six-year limitations period in Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.420 rather than the three-year limitations period in Mo.”
Jeffrey Cox, et al.
vs.
The Bank of New York Mellon (Mo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “The circuit court granted the motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations defense, but it did not address BNYM’s alternative ground for dismissal, i.e., lack of personal jurisdiction.”
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.