section 535

Citation: section 535
Parent Document: MICHAEL YOUNKER, BRAD NECKERMANN, ADAM CHADEK, and AMANDA CHADEK v. INVESTMENT REALTY, INC., MICHAEL WOESSNER, LINDA WOESSNER, CURTIS D. BAXTER, SARAH BAXTER, and WILLIAMSBURG APARTMENTS, INC., Defendants-Respondents. (2015)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 2015-02-20
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2780934/michael-younker-brad-neckermann... ↗

Full Text

689 chars

If a party seeks to expand the grounds for a summary judgment motion or enlarge the record after
         the motion and response has been filed, allowing such an expansion is prejudicial. Cross v. Drury
         Inns, Inc., 32 S.W.3d 632, 637 (Mo.App.2000). Allowing the movant to raise new factual issues,
         grounds or arguments within summary judgment proceedings, without offering the other party the
         opportunity to respond, violates Rule 74.04 and results in prejudice for the opposing party. Id. If
         a party fails to comply with Rule 74.04(c) and such failure is prejudicial, then reversal is required.
         Morley v. Henske, 704 S.W.2d 298 (Mo.App.1986).

Other Sections in This Document (328)

Full Text