Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style State of Missouri ex rel Euclid Plaza Associates L L C Relator v Honorable David C Mason Circuit Court Judge Presiding in Division No 31 of the Circuit Court of the City of St Louis Missouri Respondent Case Number ED80801 Handdown Date 05 14 2002 Appeal From Original Proceeding in Prohibition Counsel for Appellant Ryan S Shaughnessy Counsel for Respondent Kenneth D Goins Opinion Summary Euclid Plaza Associates L L C filed a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to prohibit the enforcement of a contempt order entered by respondent the Honorable David C Mason PRELIMINARY ORDER MADE ABSOLUTE Division Six holds Judge Mason exceeded his jurisdiction in finding Euclid Plaza in contempt for violating a stay order when Euclid Plaza did not violate any specific term in the stay order Citation Opinion Author Robert G Dowd Jr Presiding Judge Opinion Vote PRELIMINARY ORDER MADE ABSOLUTE Ahrens and Draper JJ concur Opinion Relator Euclid Plaza Associates L L C Euclid Plaza filed a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to prohibit the enforcement of a contempt order entered by Respondent the Honorable David C Mason Respondent filed suggestions in opposition We issued a preliminary order in prohibition Thereafter Respondent filed an answer We dispense with further briefing in the interest of justice Rule 84 24 j The preliminary order is now made absolute In July 1998 Euclid Plaza purchased the Euclid Plaza Office Building at a tax sale In August 1998 the Institute L L C and the African American Law Firm L L C collectively referred to as the AALF entered into a long term lease with the prior owner of the office building In September 1998 Euclid Plaza had the tax sale confirmed and received a sheriff s deed Subsequent to the confirmation of the tax sale a dispute arose between Euclid Plaza and the AALF regarding the validity of the long term lease executed by the AALF Euclid Plaza asserted that the long term lease was extinguished by the tax sale and the AALF asserted that the lease was valid and binding on Euclid Plaza Acknowledging the dispute Euclid Plaza and the AALF attempted to negotiate the terms and conditions of a new lease The negotiations reached an impasse after eight months In September or October 1999 Euclid Plaza provided written notice to the AALF that the monthly rent would increase from 1 500 to 2 033 effective November 1 1999 On November 1 1999 and each month thereafter the AALF tendered 1 500 and refused to pay the increase in rent Thereafter Euclid Plaza filed suit for collection of past due rent and for possession of the leased premises from the AALF The AALF filed a counterclaim and a second lawsuit for declaratory judgment The matters were consolidated and tried before the Honorable David C Mason On July 27 2000 Judge Mason entered a judgment in favor of Euclid Plaza and against the AALF finding that the AALF occupied the leased premises under an oral monthto month tenancy Judge Mason awarded Euclid Plaza past due rent and possession of the leased premises Judge Mason however stayed execution of the judgment for possession conditioned upon the payment of the past due rent and upon payment of 2 033 33 each month thereafter pending an appeal In September 2000 the AALF filed its notice of appeal and made the necessary payments into the court registry to stay execution of the judgment On November 15 2000 the AALF filed an amended motion to modify the amount of the supersedeas bond On November 22 and again on November 28 2000 Euclid Plaza served the AALF with written notice that it intended to increase the monthly rent from 2 033 to 3 500 effective January 1 2001 On December 19 2000 the AALF filed a motion to maintain the supersedeas bond On January 29 2001 this court denied the motion as unnecessary stating the judgment of July 27 2000 setting forth the terms of the stay remain in effect On February 1 2001 Euclid Plaza filed a motion to increase the amount of the supersedeas bond from 2 033 to 3 500 which was denied on February 5 2001 On September 18 2001 this court issued its opinion affirming Judge Mason s judgment in Euclid Plaza Associates L L C v African American Law Firm L L C 55 S W 3d 446 Mo App E D 2001 and subsequently issued its mandate affirming the judgment On or about September 4 2001 before the issuance of the appellate opinion the AALF voluntarily vacated and surrendered possession of the leased premises In October 2001 Euclid Plaza filed a new suit to collect the past due rent accruing from January 2001 through September 2001 The AALF filed a motion to dismiss and or for summary judgment alleging that the claim was barred by the doctrine of res judicata and by the posting of the supersedeas bond The Honorable Michael Mullen Associate Circuit Judge denied the motion to dismiss and or for summary judgment Thereafter the AALF filed a petition for writ of prohibition which was denied on January 18 2002 The cause was assigned to the Honorable Edward Sweeney Associate Circuit Judge presiding in Division No 29 of the Circuit Court of the City of St Louis Missouri On January 24 2002 the AALF filed its motion for civil contempt with Judge Mason requesting that Judge Mason find Euclid Plaza in contempt of court for violating the terms and conditions of the July 27 2000 judgment and the order of the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District by increasing the amount of rent set by the judgment from 2 033 to 3 500 Judge Mason directed Euclid Plaza to appear and show cause why they should not be held in contempt On February 7 2002 Judge Mason conducted a hearing on the show cause order and found Euclid Plaza in contempt In granting the AALF s motion for contempt Judge Mason stated in his written judgment t his Court finds Euclid Plaza to be in contempt of this Court and Euclid Plaza is HEREBY ORDERED to dismiss its action for unpaid rent against the AALF On February 25 2002 Euclid Plaza filed a petition for a writ of prohibition asking this court to prohibit Respondent Judge Mason from enforcing his contempt order directing Euclid Plaza to dismiss its action pending in front of Judge Sweeney in Division No 29 of the circuit court This court s power to issue remedial writs derives from Article V Section 4 1 of the Missouri Constitution Generally writs of prohibition are issued when they fall within one of three categories 1 where there is a usurpation of judicial power because the trial court lacks
View Full Document
Unlocking...