Pro Se Motion
Where a defendant challenged the denial of his pro se post-conviction motion, arguing that the circuit clerk’s failure to retain an envelope prevented him from proving that the motion was timely filed, the defendant was not prejudiced by the circuit clerk’s failure to retain the envelope in which the motion was mailed since the envelope was returned to him and therefore was available for his use in future proceedings.
Judgment is affirmed.
Osborn v. State (MLW No. 79366/Case No. WD84942 – 10 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Thomson, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Boone County, Harris, J. (Carol Jansen, Columbia, for appellant) (Nathan J. Aquino, Jefferson City, for respondent).
Where appellant challenged her commitment to a county academy, arguing that she should have been granted a continuance of the dispositional hearing, the appeal was moot because the appellant had completed her commitment to the academy and was then ordered to be detained in a juvenile detention center pending a hearing based on new allegations in a subsequent motion to modify.
Appeal is dismissed.
In Re the Matter of: K.L.M. v. Juvenile Officer (MLW No.79365/Case No. WD85029 – 6 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Hardwick, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Buchanan County, Robb, J. (Jeffrey C. Esparza, Kansas City, MO for appellant) (Shariece L. Canady, St. Joseph, for respondent).
Discovery Of Assets
Where decedent’s estate filed a petition for the discovery of assets against five defendants, alleging that the defendants had misappropriated property in which the decedent had an interest before he died, the trial court properly dismissed the estate’s petition for failure to state a claim since it failed to allege that the property at issue was or should have been part of the estate.
Judgment is affirmed.
In the Estate of Virgil D. Williams v. Bauman (MLW No. 79364/Case No. WD85399 – 9 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Ahuja, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Andrew County, Ordnung, J. (Diane K. Hook, St. Joseph, for appellant) (Kathy K. Sadoun, St. Joseph, and Robert E. Sundell, Maryville, for respondents).
Where a claimant of unemployment compensation challenged determinations that she was ineligible for benefits and that she was overpaid for benefits, the claimant’s appeal was untimely, but she showed good cause because she did not receive either determination from the division, the record contained little evidence showing that that the division mailed the determinations, and the claimant appealed as soon as she was able while navigating a confusing administrative process, so the matter is reversed and remanded, and the tribunal must first address the eligibility issue before deciding on the overpayment of benefits.
Judgment is reversed and remanded.
Sanders v. Division of Employment Security (MLW No. 79363/Case No. WD85554 – 17 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Sutton, J.) Appealed from the Labor and Industrial Labor Commission (Tracy Sanders, pro se) (Sarah Lipp, Jefferson City, for respondent).