Case law

Harmony Pointe, LLC v. City of Cottleville, MO

Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 2025

Board of Zoning Adjustment of City of Kansas City, 543 S.W.3d 28, 33 (Mo. banc 2018); Moto, Inc. v. Board of Adjustment of City of St. Louis, 88 S.W.3d 96, 99 (Mo. App. E.D. 2002). … See Missouri Supreme Court Rule 84.05(e) (2024); Antioch Community Church v. Board of Zoning Adjustment of City of Kansas City, 543 S.W.3d 28, 33 (Mo. banc 2018); Moto, Inc. v. Board of Adjustment of City of St.

Hutchens v. St. Louis County

848 S.W.2d 616 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 2, 1993

Board of Adjustment of the Village of Bel-Ridge, 804 S.W.2d 821, 822 (Mo.App.1991) (quoting Cunningham v. Board of Aldermen of the City of Overland, 691 S.W.2d 464, 466 (Mo.App.1985)). … Rosedale-Skinker Improvement Assn. v. Board of Adjustment of the City of St. Louis, 425 S.W.2d 929, 933 (Mo. banc 1968); Volkman v. City of Kirkwood, 624 S.W.2d 58, 61 (Mo.App.1981).

State v. Luckinbill

744 S.W.2d 872 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 4, 1988

State v. Miller, 653 S.W.2d 222, 224 (Mo.App.1983); State v. … State v. Williams, 376 S.W.2d 133, 136 (Mo.1964); State v. Danforth, 654 S.W.2d 912, 915 (Mo.App.1983).

State v. Cannady

670 S.W.2d 948 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 24, 1984

State v. Cannady, 655 S.W.2d 826 (Mo.App.1983). … Compare, Wingate v. Wainwright, 464 F.2d 209, 212-214 (5th Cir.1972) (barring the use of evidentiary facts); U.S. v. Mespoulede, 597 F.2d 329, 334-336 (2nd Cir.1979) (same); U.S. v.

Bennett v. St. Louis Car Roofing Co.

19 Mo. App. 349 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 1885

In Dunstan v. Gas Co. (3 Barn. & Ad. 125); Loan *352 Ass’n. v. Stonemetz (29 Pa. St. 536); Holder v. R. R. Co. ( 71 Ill. 106 ), and Bulls v. Wood ( 37 N. … An inference of a valid contract does not, therefore, arise necessarily, although his allegations be literally true, because, as we said in Patrick v. Gas Co. ( 17 Mo.

McQuiddy v. Vineyard

60 Mo. App. 610 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jan 28, 1895

Stifel v. Southern Cooperage Co., 38 Mo. App. 340 . … This exact question was presented to us in Forry v. Ridge, 56 Mo. App. 615 . We there decided the ordinance valid, under the same circumstances that we have here.

Ortbals v. Special School District of St. Louis County

762 S.W.2d 437 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Oct 25, 1988

Board of Education, Mt. Vernon Schools v. Shank, 542 S.W.2d 779, 781-82 (Mo.banc 1976) (quoting Merideth v. Board of Education of Rockwood R-6 School Dist., 513 S.W.2d 740, 745 (Mo.App.E.D.1974)). … In her brief before this court, Ortbals cites Brouillette v.

State v. McCrary

655 S.W.2d 79 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 7, 1983

State v. Degraffenreid, 477 S.W.2d 57 (Mo. banc 1972). However, such testimony is admissible to rehabilitate the witness after he has been impeached. Degraffenreid; State v. Atkins, 545 S.W.2d 656 (Mo.App.1976). … Brown gave the police. Patricia Brown, the stepmother of the victim, was then put on the stand to rehabilitate Jeffrey Brown and his identification of appellant.

State v. Lee

492 S.W.2d 28 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 20, 1973

Brown, and his sister, Mrs. Mason, that “This is real. This is a hold-up.” Mr. Brown was told by the man with the gun to lie on the floor and to remove the money from his pockets. … Brown and Mrs. Mason toward the stairs to the basement. Defendant was placed under arrest. When Mrs.

State v. Sexton

75 S.W.3d 304 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 13, 2002

Brown v. State, 66 S.W.3d 721 (Mo.banc 2002). … See Brown, 66 S.W.3d at 732 . Point V is denied. The judgment denying Defendant’s Rule 29.07(d) motion is affirmed. MONTGOMERY, J., and BARNEY, C.J., concur. 1 .

Gerald W. Tyler and Kathryn Tyler v. City of Marshall, Missouri and City of Marshall Board of Building Code Enforcement

Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 16, 2020

State Bd. of Registration for Healing Arts v. Draper, 280 S.W.3d 134, 136 (Mo. App. 2009). … Vaughn v. City of St. Louis Dept. of Health and Hospitals, 878 S.W.2d 852, 853 (Mo. App. 1994).

Calvin v. State

204 S.W.3d 220 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 2006

Brown v. State, 45 S.W.3d 506, 508 (Mo. App. W.D.2001) (citations omitted). … Oberg v. Oberg, 869 S.W.2d 235, 238 (Mo.App. W.D.1993). See also Denton v. Sims, 884 S.W.2d 86, 90 (Mo.App.

Laurie H. Abernathy, Petitioner/Respondent v. Vincent T. Abernathy

445 S.W.3d 638 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Oct 14, 2014

Brown v. Brown, 19 S.W.3d 717, 724 (Mo. App. W.D. 2000); In re Marriage of Wilson, 181 S.W.3d 575, 583 (Mo. App. W.D. 2005); Forhan v. Forhan, 693 S.W.2d 164, 165 (Mo. App. E.D. 1985). … See Hueckel v. Wondel, 270 S.W.3d 450, 456 (Mo. App. S.D. 2008); Brown, 19 S.W.3d at 724.

Smith v. Smith

743 S.W.2d 476 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 20, 1987

Brown v. Brown, 670 S.W.2d 167, 169 (Mo.App.1984). *479 Respondent was not required to prove that Mr. Smith had the ability to comply with the court's decree. He had the burden to show that he was not able to comply. … The only case which appellant cites for his contention that there must be specific findings of the contemner’s resources that will suffice to prove his ability to purge is Brown v. Brown, supra, 670 S.W.2d 167 .

Lynch v. Webb City School District No. 92

373 S.W.2d 193 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Dec 6, 1963

The courts have “inflexibly enforced” the rule of such statute prohibiting dismissal by the board. It has no implied authority to dismiss for any reason. Lemasters v. Willman, Mo.App., 281 S.W.2d 580 ; Magenheim v. … Lemasters v. Willman, supra, Mo.App., 281 S.W.2d 580, 590 ; see Magenheim v. Board of Ed. of School Dist. of Riverview Gardens, supra, Mo.App., 347 S.W.2d 409 .

State Ex Rel. Sheridan v. Hudson

400 S.W.2d 425 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 15, 1966

Nicolai v. Board of Adjustment of City of Tucson, 55 Ariz. 283 , 101 P.2d 199 . … Adams v. Board of Zoning Adjustment of Kansas City, Mo.App., 241 S.W.2d 35 ; Nelson v. Donaldson, supra; Nicolai v. Board of Adjustment of City of Tucson, supra.

David P. Oetting v. City of Ladue

Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 2025

Standard of Review This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Board rather than the circuit court’s judgment. Antioch Cmty. Church v. … Teefey v. Bd. of Zoning Adjustment of Kansas City, 24 S.W.3d 681, 684 (Mo. banc 2000)).

Schnell v. Zobrist

323 S.W.3d 403 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 29, 2010

In reviewing the Board’s decision, we must consider the entire record and not simply the evidence that supports the Board’s decision. Coffer v. Wasson-Hunt, 281 S.W.3d 308, 310 (Mo. banc 2009). … We, however, do not defer to the Board’s decision on *410 questions of law. Vivona v. Zobrist, 290 S.W.3d 167, 171 (Mo.App.2009).

Powell v. Powell

250 S.W.3d 831 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 29, 2008

Bastain v. Brown, 28 S.W.3d 494, 495 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). Appellant “has not filed a transcript in this case, although [her] brief references testimony and facts allegedly given at hearings and at the trial. … Brown v. Ameristar Casino Kansas City, Inc., 211 S.W.3d 145, 147 (Mo.App. W.D.2007) (internal quotation omitted). Failure to comply with the rules of appellate procedure is a proper ground for dismissing an appeal.

Mitchell v. Nixon

351 S.W.3d 676 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jul 19, 2011

Johnson v. Missouri Board of Probation & Parole, 92 S.W.3d 107, 114 (Mo.App. W.D.2002) (internal quotation omitted). … Spencer v. State, 334 S.W.3d 559 , 569 n. 8 (Mo.App. W.D.2010).