Class Actions Attorney in Kansas City, Missouri

What happened in the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund Case?

More In This Category

View Transcript

This is an interesting case that was filed about six years ago. The issue in this case involved the state of Missouri, where a fee of $3 is required for every case filed, whether criminal or civil. This fee is paid to the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund. However, the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund does not support the sheriffs working in the courthouses or out serving process; rather, it funds elected sheriffs and their spouses, essentially politicians, rather than the people actually involved in the administration of justice.

The case was referred to the firm by a judge who suspected something was wrong. Upon reviewing it, they discovered that the Missouri Supreme Court had previously ruled that no fees could be charged to the public unless they were directly related to the administration of justice. Clearly, giving $3 to an elected official’s campaign and his spouse did not meet this criteria.

The firm filed a lawsuit against the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund, which at the time had an estimated value of $40 million. They filed the action on the grounds of unjust enrichment. As expected, the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund vigorously contested the case. It was unusual for a class action consumer case to go to trial, as most of these cases are resolved beforehand, but this one went to trial and lasted about eight days. The team presented substantial evidence, including numerous depositions. A particularly interesting piece of evidence was a tape of the Speaker of the House in Missouri, who was also a retired sheriff. On the tape, the Speaker threatened the legislature that he would not fund the courts unless they approved the $3 fee. This tape was introduced into evidence, which the firm believed to be very powerful.

Despite their efforts, the firm lost the case at the trial court level, which was anticipated. They then took the case to the Missouri Supreme Court, which ruled in their favor. The Supreme Court’s decision was a 6-0 vote in favor of the class suing the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund. This was a landmark case that changed how fees are collected in Missouri and will impact future litigants, especially regarding access to the court system. It’s a case that the firm feels very good about.

Kansas City, MO personal injury attorney Geordie McGonagle talks about what happened in the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund Case. He explains that it was an interesting case filed approximately six years ago. The issue centered around a $3 fee charged for every case filed in Missouri, whether criminal or civil, with the funds directed to the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund. However, the fund in question was not for sheriffs who work in courthouses or serve process, but for elected sheriffs and their spouses.

The case was referred by a judge who recognized something was amiss. Upon investigation, it was discovered that the Missouri Supreme Court had previously ruled that fees cannot be charged to the public unless they are directly related to the administration of justice. Clearly, funneling $3 to an elected official’s campaign and their spouse did not align with this criterion.

A lawsuit was filed against the Sheriff’s Retirement Fund, which at the time held a value of approximately $40 million, under the theory of unjust enrichment. As anticipated, the defendants mounted a vigorous defense. This case became one of the rare consumer class actions that went to trial, as most of these cases are resolved earlier. The trial lasted about eight days, with solid evidence presented, including numerous depositions.

A key piece of evidence was a recording of the Speaker of the House in Missouri, a retired sheriff, who had threatened the legislature with withholding court funding unless the fee was approved. The recording was admitted into evidence, marking a powerful moment in the trial.

Although the trial court ruled against the plaintiffs, this outcome was anticipated, and the case was promptly appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiffs with a 6-0 decision, concluding that the fee was improper. This case had a significant impact, altering how fees are collected in Missouri and potentially influencing access to the court system for many litigants. It remains a case of great personal pride for those involved.

More Videos From This Lawyer