Missouri Appeal Reinstates $968,339 Default Judgment for Wrongful Death Family

A default judgment can feel fragile when the defendant later appears and argues that it was never properly served. But a new Missouri wrongful death appeal shows that a sheriff’s return of service still carries real weight. In McNowelly v. Sodecia Automotive Kansas City, LLC, No. WD88000 (Mo. Ct. App. W.D. May 26, 2026), the Missouri Court of Appeals reversed an order setting aside a default judgment awarding $968,339 in damages and sent the case back for that judgment to be reinstated.

For the wrongful death family, this was a favorable ruling. The Western District held that Sodecia Automotive Kansas City, LLC did not present clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption that service was valid when a sheriff served the company’s HR manager at its Kansas City business office.

What Happened Before the Lawsuit

According to the opinion, the decedent worked as a security guard for a third-party security company that monitored and patrolled Sodecia’s manufacturing facility in Kansas City. On December 16, 2018, while allegedly working at that facility, he was shot and killed.

The decedent’s family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Sodecia in Jackson County Circuit Court in October 2019. The summons and petition were served in March 2020 at Sodecia’s business office in Kansas City. The sheriff’s return said service was made on the company’s HR manager, who said he was the person in charge of the office.

Why the Trial Court Set Aside the Judgment

Sodecia did not answer the petition, and the trial court entered a default judgment in December 2020 awarding $968,339 in damages. More than three years later, Sodecia moved to set aside that judgment, arguing it was void because the company had not been properly served and the court therefore lacked personal jurisdiction.

Sodecia relied largely on testimony and an affidavit from its plant manager. He said the HR manager was not the company’s registered agent, authorized agent, operating-agreement manager, or the person responsible for accepting legal papers. The trial court accepted Sodecia’s argument and set aside the default judgment.

Why the Missouri Court of Appeals Reversed

The Court of Appeals started with an important service-of-process rule. When a sheriff completes a return of service, that return is prima facie evidence that service was proper. To undo a judgment years later on the theory that service was invalid, the defendant must overcome that presumption with clear and convincing evidence.

The Western District held that Sodecia did not meet that heavy burden. The sheriff’s return was not facially deficient because it identified the company, the place of service, the date and time of service, and the HR manager who accepted service at the business office. The court also explained that the relevant question was not whether the HR manager held a formal corporate title or had been designated to accept service. Under Missouri’s rule, service can be made by leaving the summons and petition at a business office with the person having charge of that office at the time.

That distinction mattered. Sodecia’s plant manager was not present at the facility when service occurred. The company did not call the HR manager to testify, did not provide an affidavit from him, and did not establish who else was in charge of the office that day. The court found that a bare denial that the HR manager was in charge was not enough to impeach a presumptively valid sheriff’s return.

Why This Matters for Wrongful Death Families

This decision matters because serious injury and wrongful death cases are often fought not only over what happened, but also over procedure. Service of process, default judgments, motions to set aside, and personal jurisdiction can decide whether a family keeps a judgment or has to start over years after a fatal incident.

The ruling is helpful for plaintiffs because it reinforces finality when the defendant waits years to attack service and offers only thin evidence. It also shows why careful documentation at the beginning of a case can become crucial later. A valid return of service, a clear record, and prompt attention to procedural rules may protect a family’s recovery long after the underlying facts have faded.

For families pursuing a fatal injury claim, Henderson Law Firm’s wrongful death lawyer page explains how experienced counsel can evaluate liability, damages, insurance issues, and procedural risks from the start of the case.

Takeaway

The practical lesson from McNowelly v. Sodecia Automotive Kansas City, LLC is that defendants do not get an easy second chance to erase a wrongful death judgment years later. If a sheriff’s return shows proper service, the defendant must bring clear and convincing evidence to prove otherwise. For wrongful death families, experienced counsel can help build the record, preserve every available claim, and protect the value of the case from both factual and procedural attacks.