# Hoover's Dairy, Inc. v. Mid-America Dairymen, Inc./Special Products, Inc.

> Supreme Court of Missouri · November 21, 1985 · 700 S.W.2d 426

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9769674

## Case

- **Full name:** HOOVER’S DAIRY, INC., Respondent, v. MID-AMERICA DAIRYMEN, INC./SPECIAL PRODUCTS, INC., Appellant, and DEC International, Inc., Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Missouri
- **Decided:** November 21, 1985
- **Citations:** 700 S.W.2d 426; 1985 Mo. LEXIS 290
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Billings
- **Judges:** Welliver, Higgins, Maus, Donnelly, Billings, Blackmar, Rendlen, Robertson
- **Cited by:** 217 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9769674

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining punitive damages are submissible when defendant knows “or had reason to know that there was a high degree of probability that the action would result in injury”
- explaining “knowledge is an element that must [often] be included in a negligence instruction in order to impose the existence of the claimed duty” (footnote omitted)
- holding the basic elements of a prima facie negligence claim are duty, breach of that duty, causation, and damages
- noting that duty arises from a “calculus of factors” including social considerations, moral culpability, economic burdens, foreseeability, and prevention of future harm

## Opinion text

BILLINGS, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the principal opinion except as to that part that declares as a matter of law that the evidence was insufficient to submit a punitive damage instruction and reversing the award of punitive damages. In my view, there was substantial evidence from which the fact finder could conclude that the negligent conduct of the defendants rose to the level of reckless indifference.
I would affirm the judgment.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9769674. Public record. Not legal advice.