IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF [________________________________] COUNTY

STATE OF MISSOURI

[____________________] JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

[PLAINTIFF'S FULL NAME],

Plaintiff,

v.

Cause No.: [____________________]

[DEFENDANT'S FULL NAME],

Division: [____]

Defendant.

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

PURSUANT TO MO. SUP. CT. R. 55.27

TIMING NOTICE

A defendant in Missouri has 30 days after service of process to file a responsive pleading. Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.25(a). This Motion is filed in lieu of an answer prior to the expiration of that deadline. If this Court denies the Motion or postpones its disposition until trial, Defendant's answer must be filed within [____] days after notice of the Court's action, unless the Court orders a different time. Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a).

Hearing Request: Defendant requests oral argument on this Motion and asks that a hearing date be set at the Court's convenience.

GROUNDS FOR MOTION

NOW COMES Defendant, [________________________________] ("Defendant"), by and through counsel, [________________________________], and pursuant to Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27, moves this Court to dismiss Plaintiff's Petition on the following grounds (check all that apply):

☐ Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)(1) — Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter.
This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear and determine the claims asserted in Plaintiff's Petition.

☐ Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)(2) — Lack of jurisdiction over the person.
This Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Defendant.

☐ Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)(3) — Improper venue.
Venue in [________________________________] County is improper.

☐ Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)(4) — Insufficiency of process.
The process issued in this action is legally deficient.

☐ Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)(5) — Insufficiency of service of process.
Service of process upon Defendant was legally insufficient.

☐ Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)(6) — Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Even accepting all well-pleaded facts as true, Plaintiff's Petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

☐ Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)(7) — Failure to join a party under Rule 52.04.
Plaintiff has failed to join a party whose joinder is required under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 52.04.

☐ Statute of Limitations:
Plaintiff's claims are time-barred under the applicable Missouri statute of limitations.

☐ Other Affirmative Defense:
[________________________________]

WAIVER OF DEFENSES — Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(g)

PRACTITIONER'S NOTE: Under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(g)(1), a party waives the defenses of: (1) lack of personal jurisdiction; (2) improper venue; (3) insufficiency of process; and (4) insufficiency of service of process by failing to raise them either in a motion under this rule or in a responsive pleading. Subject matter jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, and failure to join an indispensable party are not subject to waiver by omission.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Plaintiff [________________________________] filed a Petition in this Court on [__/__/____].

2. Defendant was served with the Summons and Petition on [__/__/____].

3. Defendant's responsive pleading is due on [__/__/____] (30 days after service).

4. This Motion is filed before the expiration of Defendant's time to answer.

5. [________________________________]

6. [________________________________]

7. [________________________________]

8. [________________________________]

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

I. LEGAL STANDARD — MISSOURI FACT PLEADING AND RULE 55.27(a)(6)

Missouri is a fact-pleading jurisdiction. Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.05 requires that a petition contain "a short and plain statement of the facts showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Unlike federal notice pleading or some state jurisdictions' more liberal standards, Missouri requires plaintiffs to plead the ultimate facts — not mere conclusions of law — supporting each element of each claim asserted.

On a motion to dismiss under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)(6), the Court tests the legal sufficiency of the petition without considering evidence outside the pleadings. The Court must assume that all well-pleaded facts are true and liberally construe the petition in Plaintiff's favor. Doe v. McFarlane, 207 S.W.3d 52, 58 (Mo. App. 2006). Dismissal is appropriate if the petition fails to invoke substantive principles of law entitling plaintiff to relief. Id.

Important Procedural Rule: If matters outside the pleadings are presented in connection with a Rule 55.27(a)(6) motion, the procedure of Rule 74.04 (summary judgment) applies. The trial court must either exclude the outside evidence or convert the motion to a motion for summary judgment and allow the parties appropriate opportunity to submit evidence. Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(b); Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice, LLC v. Davis, 2023 Mo. App. [citation].

Missouri Fact-Pleading Requirement: Missouri courts have consistently held that a petition must allege facts — not merely legal conclusions — supporting each element of a claim. Luft v. Schoene, 155 S.W.3d 179, 183 (Mo. App. 2005). Bare legal conclusions, even if cast in factual form, are insufficient. The plaintiff must plead ultimate facts, meaning the facts from which the legal conclusion follows, rather than the legal conclusion itself.

II. ARGUMENT

A. LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION — R. 55.27(a)(1)

[Complete this section if asserting subject matter jurisdiction ground.]

Missouri Circuit Courts are courts of general jurisdiction, but subject matter jurisdiction may be lacking in this case because:

☐ This claim falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of a state administrative agency: [________________________________], pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. § [________________________________].

☐ Plaintiff's claims are preempted by federal law, which grants exclusive jurisdiction over such claims to federal courts under [________________________________].

☐ Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action under Missouri law because [________________________________].

☐ The claim is moot because [________________________________].

☐ Other: [________________________________].

Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived and may be raised at any time. State ex rel. Henderson v. Asel, 566 S.W.2d 476 (Mo. banc 1978). If this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, it must dismiss the action regardless of the merits of the underlying claim.

[Develop argument: ________________________________]

B. LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION — R. 55.27(a)(2)

[Complete this section if asserting personal jurisdiction ground.]

Missouri's long-arm statute, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 506.500, authorizes jurisdiction over persons who, in person or through an agent: (1) transact any business within the state; (2) make any contract within the state; (3) commit a tortious act within the state; (4) own, use, or possess real property situated in the state; (5) contract to insure any person, property, or risk located within the state; or (6) engage in sexual intercourse in this state.

Even if the long-arm statute is satisfied, the exercise of personal jurisdiction must comport with due process. The defendant must have "minimum contacts" with Missouri such that maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945). After Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 582 U.S. 255 (2017), for specific jurisdiction, each plaintiff's claim must arise out of the defendant's contacts with the forum.

Defendant is domiciled in [________________________________] and:

☐ Does not transact business in Missouri.
☐ Did not make any contract in Missouri relating to this dispute.
☐ Did not commit any tortious act in Missouri.
☐ Does not own, use, or possess real property in Missouri.
☐ Has no purposeful availment of the privileges of conducting activities in Missouri.
☐ Plaintiff's claims do not arise out of or relate to any Missouri contacts.

Supporting affidavit: Exhibit [____].

[Develop argument: ________________________________]

C. IMPROPER VENUE — R. 55.27(a)(3)

[Complete this section if asserting improper venue.]

Missouri venue is governed primarily by Mo. Rev. Stat. § 508.010, which provides that venue lies in:
- The county where the cause of action accrued;
- The county where the defendant resides;
- For a corporate defendant, any county where the corporation's registered agent is located, where it has a principal place of business, or where the cause of action accrued.

Venue in [________________________________] County is improper because:

☐ Defendant is not a resident of [________________________________] County. Defendant resides in [________________________________] County.

☐ The cause of action did not accrue in [________________________________] County. It accrued in [________________________________] County because [________________________________].

☐ The corporate defendant's registered agent is not located in [________________________________] County, and the corporation has no principal place of business in [________________________________] County.

☐ Other: [________________________________].

The proper venue for this action is [________________________________] County. Defendant requests dismissal or transfer to the proper venue.

D. INSUFFICIENCY OF PROCESS OR SERVICE — R. 55.27(a)(4) and (5)

[Complete this section if asserting insufficiency of process or service.]

Process Deficiency — R. 55.27(a)(4):

☐ The Summons issued in this action fails to comply with the requirements of Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 54.01 because [________________________________].

☐ The Summons was not signed by the Clerk of Court as required by Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 54.01.

☐ Other: [________________________________].

Service of Process Deficiency — R. 55.27(a)(5):

Missouri service of process requirements are set forth in Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 54.13. Service on an individual requires personal service, abode service, or service by certified mail with return receipt requested. Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 54.13(b)(1)-(4).

☐ Plaintiff attempted to serve Defendant by [________________________________], which does not comply with Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 54.13 because [________________________________].

☐ The process server was not authorized under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 506.140 to serve process in Missouri.

☐ The person served was not authorized to accept service on behalf of Defendant.

☐ The Summons and Petition were not served within 30 days after the filing of the Petition as required by Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 54.01(a). [Note: If not served within 30 days, service may be quashed, though a new summons may be obtained.]

☐ Other: [________________________________].

E. FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM — R. 55.27(a)(6)

[Complete this section if asserting failure to state a claim. Attach no evidence — the analysis is limited to the four corners of the Petition.]

Plaintiff's Petition, even assuming all well-pleaded facts are true, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Missouri law because:

Claim 1: [________________________________]

The essential elements of a claim for [________________________________] under Missouri law are:
1. [________________________________]
2. [________________________________]
3. [________________________________]
4. [________________________________]
5. [________________________________]

☐ Plaintiff's Petition fails to allege essential element(s) [________________________________] because [________________________________].

☐ Plaintiff's Petition pleads only legal conclusions, not ultimate facts, with respect to [________________________________].

☐ The cause of action asserted is not recognized under Missouri law: [________________________________].

☐ Plaintiff's claim is barred as a matter of law by [________________________________] because [________________________________].

Claim 2: [________________________________] [If applicable]

[Repeat element analysis for each claim in the Petition.]

The Fact-Pleading Analysis:

Under Missouri's fact-pleading standard, Plaintiff was required to plead the ultimate facts showing entitlement to relief for each element of each claim. Bosch v. St. Louis Healthcare Network, 41 S.W.3d 462, 464 (Mo. banc 2001). Plaintiff's Petition, at paragraph(s) [____], contains only the following allegations: "[________________________________]." These allegations constitute nothing more than [legal conclusions / labels / formulaic recitation of elements] and fail to set forth the specific facts upon which Plaintiff relies.

F. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS

[Complete this section if raising statute of limitations. Under Missouri procedure, the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense (Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27(a)) that may be raised by pre-answer motion when the bar is apparent on the face of the Petition.]

Plaintiff's claim for [________________________________] is time-barred under the applicable Missouri statute of limitations:

Applicable Statute of Limitations:
(Common Missouri limitation periods: Contract — Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120 (5 years for written contracts; no written contract: 5 years); Tort/Personal Injury — Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120(4) (5 years); Medical Malpractice — Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.105 (2 years, discovery rule applies); Legal Malpractice — Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120(4) (5 years); Fraud — Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120(5) (5 years from discovery); Wrongful Death — Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.100 (3 years).)

Limitation Period: [____] years / months under Mo. Rev. Stat. § [________________________________].

Date of Accrual: [__/__/____]
(Under Missouri law, a cause of action accrues when the damage is sustained and capable of ascertainment. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.100.)

Limitations Period Expired: [__/__/____]

Date Petition Filed: [__/__/____]

The Petition was filed [____] days/months/years after the limitations period expired, and Plaintiff's claims are therefore time-barred.

[Address any discovery rule or tolling arguments: ________________________________]

III. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court grant this Motion to Dismiss and dismiss Plaintiff's Petition in its entirety, with prejudice, together with an award of costs and attorney fees as permitted by law and court rules.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:

1. Grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.27;

2. Dismiss Plaintiff's Petition in its entirety, with prejudice;

3. Award Defendant its costs as permitted by Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 77.01;

4. Award attorney fees to the extent permitted by law, contract, or applicable statute;

5. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper under the circumstances.

SIGNATURE BLOCK

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: ___________________________________________
[Attorney Name]
Missouri Bar No.: [____________________]
[Law Firm Name]
[Street Address]
[City, Missouri ZIP]
Telephone: ([____]) [____]-[________]
Facsimile: ([____]) [____]-[________]
Email: [________________________________]
Attorney for Defendant [________________________________]

Dated: [__/__/____]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on [__/__/____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum in Support was served upon:

[Name of Plaintiff's Counsel / Plaintiff Pro Se]
[Firm Name]
[Street Address]
[City, State ZIP]

by the following method(s):

☐ Electronic service through eFlex (Missouri Courts Electronic Filing System)
☐ United States mail, first class, postage prepaid
☐ Hand delivery
☐ Electronic mail, with consent: [________________________________]
☐ Other method authorized by Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 43.01: [________________________________]

___________________________________________
[Attorney Name]
Missouri Bar No.: [____________________]
Dated: [__/__/____]

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Missouri Supreme Court Rules: https://www.courts.mo.gov/page.jsp?id=199631
• Rule 55 — Pleadings, Motions, and Hearings: https://www.courts.mo.gov/page.jsp?id=199631
• Missouri Long-Arm Statute, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 506.500: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=506.500
• Missouri Venue Statutes, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 508.010: https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=508.010
• Missouri Statutes of Limitation, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 516.100 — 516.370
• eFlex Missouri Electronic Filing: https://www.courts.mo.gov/page.jsp?id=83571
• Doe v. McFarlane, 207 S.W.3d 52 (Mo. App. 2006)
• Bosch v. St. Louis Healthcare Network, 41 S.W.3d 462 (Mo. banc 2001)