Case law

State ex rel. Cainsville Reorganized School District No. 1 of Harrison County v. Tomes

299 S.W.2d 892 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 4, 1957

Folkers v. … Schwerdt v.

Sauvain v. Acceptance Indemnity Insurance Co.

339 S.W.3d 555 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 12, 2011

Brown v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins.. … Brown, 776 S.W.2d at 888 .

State ex rel. Whitaker v. Satterfield

386 S.W.3d 893 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2012

In State v. Brown, 636 S.W.2d 929 (Mo. banc 1982), overruled on other grounds by State v. … As interpreted in State v. Brown, 636 S.W.2d 929, 931, 936 (Mo. banc 1982), overruled on other grounds by State v.

Porter v. Hawks Nest, Inc.

659 S.W.2d 786 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 1983

Ryan v. Baptiste, 565 S.W.2d 196, 198 (Mo.App.1978). … Gerst v. Flinn, 615 S.W.2d 628, 631-632 (Mo.App.1981); Osterberger v. Hites Construction Company, 599 S.W.2d 221, 230 (Mo.App.1980).

Phillips v. Ozark Bank

803 S.W.2d 662 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 1991

McFarland v. Bollinger, 792 S.W.2d 903, 904 (Mo.App.1990). All of the evidence and legitimate inferences therefrom must be viewed in the light most favorable to the award. Brown v. … McFarland, 792 S.W.2d at 907 ; McClain v. Welsh Co., 748 S.W.2d 720, 728 (Mo.App.1988).

Carroll Construction Company v. Kansas City

278 S.W.2d 817 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 2, 1955

Several members of the Board then indicated that the Board could not approve the plan without a binding lease indicating who would occupy the property. … The scope of review, by a' court, of the decision of an administrative tribúnál has been discussed in many decisions, A brief statement of the rule is found in Wood v.

Gaffigan v. Whaley

600 S.W.2d 195 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 20, 1980

Plaintiff relies upon State v. Harris, 313 S.W.2d 664 (Mo.1958), and State v. … We must review the evidence in the light most favorable to the decision of the Board, Aubuchon v. Gasconade Cty. R-1 Sch.

Mason v. Commonwealth

559 S.W.3d 337 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 1, 2018

Commonwealth v. Stone, 291 S.W.3d 696 , 701-02 (Ky. 2009). Id. at 702 . Brown v. Commonwealth, 313 S.W.3d 577 , 631 (Ky. 2010). Id. (citing Funk v. Commonwealth, 842 S.W.2d 476 , 483 (Ky. 1992) ). … Brown, 313 S.W.3d at 631 (citing Furnish v. Commonwealth, 95 S.W.3d 34 (Ky. 2002) ). Brown, 313 S.W.3d at 631 .

Taylor v. Farmers Insurance Co.

906 S.W.2d 882 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Aug 29, 1995

In Cobb v. … Edwards v.

C. A. Burton Machinery Co. v. Ruth

194 Mo. App. 194 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 26, 1916

[Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136 ; Ins. Co. v. Leland, 90 Mo. 177 , 2 S. W. 431 ; Mechem on Officers, sec. 664.]” [Knox County v. Hunolt, 110 Mo. 67 , 74 and 75, 19 S. W. 628 ; Steadly v. Stuckey, 113 Mo. … The court was equally divided on this opinion, but later, by three to two, in Plummer v. Kennedy, 72 Mich. 295 , 40 N. W. 433 , it is approved and in Wells v. Board of Education of West Bay City, 78 Mich. 260 , 44 N.

State v. Moss

187 Mo. App. 151 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 1, 1915

[State ex rel. v. Garesche, supra; State ex rel. v. Berg, 76 Mo. 136 ; High on Extraordinary Legal Remedies (2 Ed.), p. 63, et seq.; State ex rel. v. Steers, supra; State ex rel. v. Stuckey, 78 Mo. … App. 533 ; State ex rel. v. Trigg, 72 Mo. 365 ; 26 Cyc., p. 275; 15 Cyc., p. 384; State ex rel. v. Francis, 88 Mo. 557 ; State ex rel. v. Mason, 77 Mo. 189 ; State ex rel. v.

Hawkins v. City of Fayette

604 S.W.2d 716 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Aug 4, 1980

See also Reilly v. Board of Selectmen of Framingham, 345 Mass. 363 , 187 N.E.2d 838, 840 [4] (1963); and Nantucket Land C. v. Plan. … Wolf v.

Franklin v. Harris

762 S.W.2d 847 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jan 3, 1989

In Caverno v. … Franklin concedes that he has pending a petition in the circuit court for judicial review of the School Board action pursuant to Chapter 536, RSMo 1986. In James v.

McGraw-Edison Co. v. Curry

485 S.W.2d 175 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 7, 1972

Wilson Chevrolet, Inc. v. Wilson, Mo.Sup., 332 S.W.2d 867, 871 . Without proof of notice, the Board lacked jurisdiction and its proceedings raising plaintiff’s valuation were void. State ex rel. Lane v. … (2) V.

McMorrow v. Dowell

116 Mo. App. 289 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 28, 1905

But in the case of Curd v. Brown, 148 Mo. 82 , 49 S. … It is true that in Curd v. Brown, it was the plaintiff who' was held incompetent; whereas in the present case Mrs. Levy is no party to the action.

Deitderick v. Missouri Iron & Metal Co.

222 Mo. App. 740 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 1928

W. 51 ; Deschner v. Railroad Co., 200 Mo. 310 , 98 S. W. 737 ; Tranburger v. Railroad Co., 250 Mo. 46 , 156 S. W. 694 .] We rule against defendant on this point. … [Priestley v. Laederich, 2 S. W. (2d Series), 631; Sinnamon v. Moore, 161 Mo. App. 168 , 142 S. W. 494 ; Grant v. Railway, 25 Mo. App. 227 .]

Wolford v. United States Leasing Corp.

692 S.W.2d 383 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 4, 1985

When plaintiff sold his business to Charles Brown, Sr., Charles Brown, Jr., and Emma Brown, he undertook to assign the lease to them. … City of Ferguson v. Nelson, 438 S.W.2d 249, 255 (Mo.1969); City of Cameron v. Stinson, 633 S.W.2d 437, 439 (Mo.App.1982).

Wertheimer-Swarts Shoe Co. v. McDonald

138 Mo. App. 328 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 2, 1909

We cite Coble v. McDaniel, 33 Mo. 363 ; Darrett v. Donnelly, 38 Mo. 492 ; Adams v. Trigg, 37 Mo. 141 ; Atteberry v. Powell, 29 Mo. 429 ; McCord v. Railroad, 21 Mo. App. l. c. 95. In the case of State ex inf. v. … [Childs v. Emerson, 117 Mo. App. 671 ; Haines v. Neece, 116 Mo. App. 499 ; Young v. Yan Natta, 113 Mo. App. 550 ; Danforth v. Crookshanks, 68 Mo. App. 311 ; Carter v. Black, 46 Mo. l. c. 385.]

Molasky Enterprises, Inc. v. Carps, Inc.

615 S.W.2d 83 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 7, 1981

Italo-Petroleum Corp. of America v. Hannigan, 1 Terry 534 , 14 A.2d 401, 406 [14] (Del.1940); Joseph Greenspon’s Sons Iron & Steel Co. v. Pecos Valley, supra; Willsey v. W. C. … Concurrence of Herbert and Emile Carp in the approval of such transactions cannot be counted to make up a majority of the board because they were interested directors. Italo-Petroleum Corp. of America v.

In the Interest of J.N.C.B. v. Juvenile Officer

403 S.W.3d 120 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 2013

Northeast Middle School is a closed school building and does not permit entry by anyone without authorization of the school board. … State v. Brown, 744 S.W.2d 809, 811 (Mo. banc 1988) (emphasis added). This principle necessarily presumes the integrity of the inference in the first instance.