Section 10.6 Standards of Review

• Library: Settling Cases 2014

An abuse-of-discretion standard governs appellate review of, among other things, rulings related to discovery, pretrial procedure, evidentiary rulings, closing arguments, and some posttrial motions. See generally:

· Calzaretta v. Willard, 391 S.W.3d 488, 493 (Mo. App. S.D. 2013)

· Wheeler ex rel. Wheeler v. Phenix, 335 S.W.3d 504, 510 (Mo. App. S.D. 2011)

· State v. Steele, 314 S.W.3d 845, 850 (Mo. App. W.D. 2010)

· Intertel, Inc. v. Sedgwick Claims Mgmt. Servs., Inc., 204 S.W.3d 183, 193 (Mo. App. E.D. 2006)

· Zimmer v. Fisher, 171 S.W.3d 76, 79–80 (Mo. App. E.D. 2005)

This most deferential standard of review warrants reversal only when the lower court’s “‘ruling is clearly against the logic of the circumstances then before the court and so arbitrary and unreasonable as to shock the sense of justice and indicate a lack of careful consideration.’” Johnson v. McCullough, 306 S.W.3d 551, 555 (Mo. banc 2010) (quoting Wingate by Carlisle v. Lester E. Cox Med. Ctr., 853 S.W.2d 912, 917 (Mo. banc 1993)); State v. Ward, 242 S.W.3d 698, 704 (Mo. banc 2008). Stated another way, when...