 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
West v. Director of Revenue7/13/1999
ot apply to petitions for review of the revocation of driving privileges. The statue does not apply.
The Missouri savings statute, section 516.230, states in pertinent part:
"If any action shall have been commenced within the times respectively prescribed in sections 516.010 to 516.370, and the plaintiff therein suffer a non-suit . . . such plaintiff may commence a new action from time to time, within one year after such non-suit suffered . . . ."
Section 516.230, the savings statute only applies to actions commenced within the times prescribed in sections 516.010 to 516.370. The sections governing the filing of petitions for review of revocation of driving privileges are not contained within those statutes. Moreover, section 516.230 is not a general procedural statute. Boggs v. Farmers State Bank of Texas County, 846 S.W.2d 233, 235 (Mo. App. S.D. 1993). The provisions of section 516.230 do not extend "to any action which is or shall be otherwise limited by statute; but such action shall be brought within the time limited by such statute." Section 516.300, RSMo 1994; See, Hehner v. Hehner, 918 S.W.2d 283, 284-85 (Mo. App. E.D. 1996); Stine v. Kansas City Terminal Ry. Co., 564 S.W.2d 619, 621 (Mo. App. 1978). This statute is "designed to assure the Missouri general statute of limitations will not be injected into a cause of action that has its own built-in statute of limitations." Thompson by Thompson v. Crawford, 833 S.W.2d 868, 871 (Mo. banc 1992).
The review of the suspension or revocation of driving privileges by Director provides its own statute of limitations and requires the petitions for review to be filed within 30 days of the mailing of the notice of revocation. Sections 302.311 & 536.110, RSMo 1994. Therefore, the savings statute does not apply to Driver's petition for review. Accordingly, the Circuit Court of St. Louis County never acquired subject matter jurisdiction to reinstate Driver's license, Goggin v. Director of Revenue, 878 S.W.2d 931, 931 (Mo. App. E.D. 1994), and the judgment to reinstate was void. The trial court did not err in granting Director's motion to set aside the judgment. Point denied.
The judgment is affirmed.
Separate Opinion:
None
Page 1 2 Missouri DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|