Court Opinion

ID: 9634714
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 13:21:35.893978+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:08.847587
License: Public Domain

WILLIAM RAY PRICE, JR.,
Judge, dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. This Court simply does not have jurisdiction over this case.
This Court may not obtain jurisdiction of the subject matter of [an] appeal by consent, waiver, or in the interest of judicial economy. We are mindful of cases of recent vintage in which this Court has retained cases before it in which it has no jurisdiction “as a matter of judicial economy.” See e.g., [State ex rel. Lack v. Melton, 692 S.W.2d 302, 304 (Mo. banc 1985) ]; Pace v. City of Hannibal, 680 S.W.2d 944, 946 (Mo. banc 1984); State v. Davis, 653 S.W.2d 167 (Mo. banc 1983); State v. Higgins, 592 S.W.2d 151 (Mo. banc 1979). The jurisdiction of this Court may not be expand*286ed beyond its constitutional limits, even in the name of judicial economy. To the extent that cases of this Court hold otherwise, they, too, must be overruled.
Kuyper v. Stone County Comm’n, 838 S.W.2d 436, 438 (Mo. banc 1992).
The majority opinion reaches the merits of this case because the case is patently without merit. However, even when the decision is easy, this Court cannot create jurisdiction to lighten the load for the lower courts.