KANSAS CITY — The Missouri Court of Appeals Western District has upheld a lower court ruling dismissing a lawsuit brought by two former members of the Western Cass Fire Protection District Board of Directors and a purported watchdog group who alleged numerous violations of the state’s Sunshine Law.
The appellate panel affirmed the judgment of the Cass County Circuit Court, which ruled in favor of the district, its board of directors, and three individual board members, according to an opinion filed July 22 in Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
The plaintiffs in the case — Darvin Schildknecht, Kerri VanMeveren and an unincorporated association called Citizens for Transparency and Accountability — had alleged a series of Sunshine Law violations by the board, including improperly noticed meetings, undisclosed closed sessions, and conducting public business outside of official meetings.
At the time the lawsuit was filed, Schildknecht and VanMeveren were both sitting board members.
The plaintiffs alleged that the board had knowingly and purposefully violated the Missouri Sunshine Law by failing to properly notify the public of meetings, discussing unauthorized matters in closed session, and conducting prearranged votes through private communication among a quorum of members.
Following a seven-day trial, the defendants moved for judgment under Rule 73.01(b), arguing that the plaintiffs’ evidence did not support the claims. They also challenged the legal sufficiency of the claims, pointing to inconsistencies in testimony and a lack of standing by the association.
The trial court granted the motion and entered judgment in favor of the defendants on all counts in June 2023, also issuing a declaratory judgment on the number and terms of the district's directors.
Shortly after the judgment, both Schildknecht and VanMeveren were removed from their board positions in a public recall election.
On appeal, the plaintiffs argued that the trial court’s judgment was against the weight of the evidence and that the court misapplied the law in several respects.
These included challenges to the finding that Citizens for Transparency and Accountability lacked standing and the notion that Schildknecht and VanMeveren had waived their right to sue by participating in the very actions they later contested.
The appellate court, however, rejected all of the plaintiffs’ arguments.
Judge Thomas N. Chapman, wrote in his opinion that the court found that many of the plaintiffs’ points on appeal were "multifarious" — meaning they improperly combined multiple legal theories and factual allegations into single points, in violation of appellate procedure.
The court noted that the plaintiffs’ failure to separate distinct claims into separate counts in their original petition created unnecessary confusion.
It also noted that the plaintiffs did not request specific findings of fact or conclusions of law from the trial court, which limited the scope of their appeal.
The appeals court also noted that the plaintiffs failed to clearly identify which specific trial court rulings they were contesting and often made unsupported assertions.
The court ultimately concluded that the trial court's judgment was supported by substantial evidence and affirmed it on all grounds, declining to review any of the twelve points raised on appeal. Judge Lisa White Hardwick concurred with the opinion, while Judge Alok Ahuja dissented in a separate opinion.
In his dissent, Ahuja argued the appellate court should have addressed the plaintiffs’ Sunshine Law claims on the merits.
He contended the trial court’s ruling on the defendants’ motion for judgment under Rule 73.01(b) must be presumed to rest on the specific arguments in that motion—not on unstated legal theories or credibility findings.
Ahuja said the plaintiffs properly tailored their appeal to those arguments, and the majority unfairly dismissed their briefing as deficient.
He noted that most evidence was uncontested and documentary, and the defendants never challenged individual claims.
Missouri Court of Appeals Western District case number: WD86415
