![]() ![]() This order was not denominated a judgment. Maple Grove filed a "Motion for Order Revoking, or in the Alternative, Modifying and Changing Interlocutory Order Appointing Receiver." The circuit court issued an order overruling Maple Grove's motion. ![]() ![]() The circuit court sustained Meadowfresh's motion. ![]() Meadowfresh subsequently sued Maple Grove and sought the appointment of a receiver for Maple Grove. Meadowfresh Solutions USA, LLC (hereinafter, "Meadowfresh") was formed simultaneously to own a majority membership in Maple Grove. In October 2011, Maple Grove was formed for the purpose of owning and operating a dairy farm in Barry County, Missouri. The case is retransferred to the Southern District for it to review the underlying merits of the circuit court's order as asserted in Maple Grove's remaining points on appeal.Īll statutory references are to RSMo 2016. This Court further holds the circuit court's order did not have to be denominated a judgment pursuant to Rule 74.01(a) for an appeal to be taken because it was an interlocutory order that did not fully resolve at least one claim and did not establish all of the rights and liabilities of the parties with respect to that claim. This Court holds the circuit court's order was appealable pursuant to sections 515.665 and 512.020(2), RSMo 2016. Maple Grove Farms, LLC, Leon Rinehart, Ted Dahlstrom, Carol Dahlstrom, Curtis Hall, Lisa Hall, and Kyle Bounous (hereinafter, and collectively, "Maple Grove") sought to appeal the circuit court's order overruling their "Motion for Order Revoking, or in the Alternative, Modifying and Changing Interlocutory Order Appointing Receiver." The Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, dismissed Maple Grove's appeal because the order was not denominated a judgment pursuant to Rule 74.01(a). APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |