Court of Appeals of Missouri, Eastern District, Second Division
from the Circuit Court of St. Louis County Cause No.
2105AC-10219 Honorable Lawrence J. Permuter
Colleen Dolan, Judge
Mees ("Appellant") appeals the motion court's
denial of his Motion for Satisfaction of Judgment and Motion
to Quash [an Execution of] Garnishment. Appellant argued
in his Motion for Satisfaction of Judgment that the default
judgment issued against him on May 4, 2005, was presumed
satisfied because ten years had elapsed since the default
judgment was entered, and Respondent's Acknowledgment of
Credit Toward Judgment on the Record was not proof of a
payment on the record sufficient to extend the life of the
judgment pursuant to § 516.350.1. Appellant argues
on appeal that the motion court erred by: (1) denying his
Motion for Satisfaction; (2) denying his Motion to Quash [an
Execution of] Garnishment; and (3) awarding post-judgment
interest. We reverse.
Factual and Procedural Background
4, 2005, a default judgment was entered against Appellant in
the amount of $6, 812.15. J&M Securities
("J&M") brought the action as an assignee after
purchasing the debt from Plaza Square
Apartments. On April 1, 2015, J&M filed an
Acknowledgment of Credit Toward Judgment on the Record and
served it via mail to Appellant's last known address.
This memorandum stated:
Comes now Plaintiff and pursuant to the provision of §
516.350.1 RSMo. acknowledges a payment or other credit, in
the nature of a partial satisfaction of judgment, to be
placed on the record of this case, as stated below:
1. Plaintiff acknowledges a payment and partial satisfaction
of the Judgment against Defendant in the amount of $50 as of
the date of this memorandum.
5, 2016, J&M filed an Execution Application and Order,
16-EXEC-2468, with a judgment balance of $6, 812.15 and
post-judgment interest in the amount of $7, 715.86 for a
total judgment of $14, 672.01. On July 14, 2016, Appellant filed
a Motion for Satisfaction of Judgment and a Motion to Quash
[an Execution of] Garnishment in which he attacked the
execution of the garnishment as unenforceable by alleging the
underlying judgment had not been revived prior to the
ten-year anniversary and was presumed paid under §
516.350. In support, Appellant filed an affidavit claiming he
had never made a payment nor authorized another to make a
payment to J&M. Appellant further swore he had not had
any contact whatsoever with J&M since the default
judgment was entered on May 5, 2005. The motion court
overruled Appellant's Motion for Satisfaction of Judgment
and Motion to Quash [an Execution of] Garnishment on July 22,
2016, in separate orders. This appeal follows.
Standard of Review
initial matter, there must be a final judgment for an
appellate court to obtain jurisdiction. Sanford v.
CenturyTel of Mo., LLC, 490 S.W.3d 717, 719 (Mo. banc
2016). Under § 512.020 a party may directly
appeal from a special order after a final judgment in a
case. A court's ruling on a motion to quash
an execution of a garnishment qualifies as a special
order and is generally appealable. Peachtree Apts. v.
Pallo, 317 S.W.3d 189, 191 (Mo. App. E.D. 2010).
"[A] motion to quash an execution is a special
proceeding attacking the enforcement of the judgment."
Carrow v. Carrow, 294 S.W.2d 595, 597 (Mo. App. E.D.
1956). The overruling of such a motion is a final and
complete disposition of the merits of the motion and is
appealable. Id. (citing §
reviewing a motion court's denial of a motion to quash an
execution of a garnishment we will affirm the court's
decision "unless it is unsupported by substantial
evidence, it is against the weight of the evidence, or it
erroneously declares or applies the law." Noble v.
Noble, 456 S.W.3d 120, 128 (Mo. App. W.D.
2015). In the absence of specific findings of
fact by the court, appellate courts consider all fact issues
to have been found in accordance with the result
reached." United States v. Brooks, 40 S.W.3d
411, 412 (Mo. App. S.D. 2001). Whether a judgment is void is
a question of law. State v. Superior Mfg., 373
S.W.3d 507, 509 (Mo. App. W.D. 2012). Accordingly, a motion
to quash an execution of a garnishment for an allegedly
invalid judgment will only be granted when the record
demonstrates the judgment is void, and appellate courts do
not make such a finding lightly. Noble, 456 S.W.3d
The motion court erred in denying ...