Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District Digest: March 2, 2023

Administrative

Medical Marijuana Cultivation License

Denial of Application

Plaintiff appealed the denial of its application for a medical marijuana cultivation license. Defendant denied the application on grounds that plaintiff had failed to include a certificate of good standing from the secretary of state.

Where defendant violated its own regulations by failing to specify in a deficiency letter that plaintiff’s application was lacking the certificate of good standing, the administrative hearing commission and trial court erred in failing to grant plaintiff relief.

Broneic, J., dissenting: “Rather, I believe the question of DHSS’s authority to approve or deny MCD’s application turns on whether DHSS, in enacting 19 C.S.R. 30-95.040(1)(B).4, intended to waive its authority to deny an application in the event its deficiency notice fails to specify a non-compliant or missing document. Because I do not believe DHSS intended such a consequence in enacting this notice provision, I would affirm the circuit court’s order, which affirmed the Commission’s summary decision in favor of DHSS.”

Judgment is reversed.

Mo Cann Do, Inc. v. Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (MLW No. 79507/Case No. ED110329 – 17 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Dowd, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis County, Albus, J. (Eric Walter, Paul L. Brusati, and Jeffrrey T. McPherson, for appellant) (Jason K. Lewis, for respondent)

https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=192819

Criminal Law

Postconviction Relief

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Defendant appealed the denial of his motion for postconviction relief, which alleged that plea counsel was ineffective for misadvising him regarding his parole eligibility.

Where defendant pled sufficient facts to establish that plea counsel had misadvised him regarding his parole eligibility, the trial court erred in denying defendant relief without an evidentiary hearing.

Judgment is reversed and remanded.

Forman v. State (MLW No. 79508/Case No. ED110319 – 7 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Hardin-Tammons, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis County, Ribuado, J. (Michael R. Durham, for appellant) (Alex D. Beezley, for respondent)

https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=192818

Statutory Rape

Prior Bad Acts Evidence

Defendant appealed his conviction for statutory rape, arguing that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of prior uncharged crimes to show his propensity to commit the charged offense.

Where the evidence was relevant to demonstrate defendant’s propensity towards sexual misconduct involving minors and where the jury could infer that defendant could still be charged for that conduct, the probative value of the evidence outweighed any prejudicial effect.

Judgment is affirmed.

State v. Shepard (MLW No. 79509/Case No. ED110268 – 18 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Torbitzky, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Franklin County, Hellman, J. (Scott Rosenblum and Nathan T. Swanson, for appellant) (Garrick F.D. Aplin, for respondent)

https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=192817

Torts

Motor Vehicle Accident

Interpleader

Defendant appealed the trial court’s judgment in an interpleader action filed by plaintiff, arising from a motor vehicle accident involving defendant’s father and respondent.

Where defendant’s brief contained no points preserving any argument for review and failed to comply with appellate briefing rules, the court dismissed the appeal.

Appeal is dismissed.

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company v. Moore (MLW No. 79506/Case No. ED110432 – 10 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Odenwald, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis County, Ribuado, J. (Larry S. Fields, for appellant) (Lee J. Karge; James A. Wilke and Kent W. Zschoche, for respondents)

https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=192820

Unemployment Compensation

Denial of Benefits

Pandemic Unemployment Assistance

Plaintiff appealed the commission’s denial of his claim for unemployment benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic. On appeal, plaintiff argued that he was eligible for pandemic unemployment assistance under the CARES Act provision covering individuals who were denied unemployment benefits because they refused to return to work for an employer who failed to comply with COVID-19 safety regulations.

Where the commission failed to address plaintiff’s claim that he was eligible for PUA benefits due to his employer’s failure to comply with COVID-19 safety regulations, the court remanded for a hearing on that issue.

Judgment is reversed and remanded.

Benoist v. Westin Trading, Inc. (MLW No. 79502/Case No. ED110753 – 17 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Broniec, J.) Appealed from Labor and Industrial Relations Commission. (John J. Benoist, Jr., appellant pro se) (Andrea M. Follett and Bart A. Matanic, for respondent; Westin Trading, Inc., respondent pro se)

https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=192824

Overpayment

Timeliness of Appeal

Plaintiff appealed the dismissal of an appeal of a determination that plaintiff had been overpaid unemployment benefits. The division’s appeals tribunal concluded that plaintiff had untimely filed the appeal. Plaintiff argued that good cause could be shown to excuse her untimely appeal.

Where good cause could not excuse the untimely appeal of an overpayment determination, the division correctly dismissed plaintiff’s appeal.

Judgment is affirmed.

Kline v. Division of Employment Security (MLW No. 79504/Case No. ED110502 – 6 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Torbitzky, J.) Appealed from Labor and Industrial Relations Commission. (J. Christopher Wehrle, for appellant) (Sarah L. Lipp, for respondent)

https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=192822

Voluntary Departure from Employment

Sufficiency of Evidence

Plaintiff appealed the commission’s denial of her application for unemployment benefits, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to support finding that she had voluntarily quit.

Where the evidence showed plaintiff failed to contact her employer for reassignment prior to filing for unemployment benefits, the commission correctly denied plaintiff’s application.

Judgment is affirmed.

Hill v. S.M. Huber Enterprises, Inc. (MLW No. 79503/Case No. ED110563 – 8 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Odenwald, J.) Appealed from Labor and Industrial Relations Commission. (Melanie L. Hill, appellant pro se) (Bart A. Matanic, for respondent; S.M. Huber Enterprises, Inc., respondent pro se)

https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=192823