Opinion

Gousetis v. Bange

  • 425 S.W.2d 91
  • 1968 Mo. LEXIS 1017
Court
Supreme Court of Missouri
Filed
Mar 11, 1968
Status
Published
Author
Storckman
On the bench
Houser, Welborn, Henley, Seiler, Storckman
Cited by
15 cases
Authority
More cited than 10.8%

The opinion

*96 Concurring Opinion

STORCKMAN, Judge.

In a similar situation I concurred in result only because: “S.Ct. Rule 70.01(c) says the prejudicial effect of an error arising out of a departure from an approved instruction will ‘be judicially determined’, while the opinion states that ‘prejudicial error will be presumed’ unless it is made perfectly clear that no prejudice could have resulted.” Brown v. St. Louis Public Service Company, Mo., 421 S.W.2d 255 , at page 260. My views as stated in Brown have not changed. Furthermore, we are admonished by other decisions of this court and by S.Ct. Rule 83.13(b) that: “No appellate court shall reverse any judgment, unless it believes that error was committed by the trial court against the appellant, materially affecting the merits of the action.”

Nevertheless, the law now is as declared by this court en banc in Brown v. St. Louis and by it I am bound. Having reiterated my view, I will now and henceforth concur without further ado.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.