Case law

Wilson ex rel. Wilson v. Stephens

757 S.W.2d 297 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 1988

Guthrie v. Brown Quarries, Inc., 741 S.W.2d 738, 739 [2] (Mo.App.1987). … In Kanagawa v.

Hamrick ex rel. Hamrick v. Affton School District Board of Education

13 S.W.3d 678 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 7, 2000

This court reviews the findings and conclusions of the board of education, an administrative agency, rather than the judgment of the circuit court. Soward v. Mahan, 926 S.W.2d 138, 141 (Mo.App. E.D.1996). … The issue of whether the board complied with the requirements of the statute is a question of law, and we review under Rule 73.01 as interpreted in Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976).

Mary L. Browning v. State of Missouri

Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 5, 2024

Swallow v. … Barber v.

Kennedy v. Empire Gas Co.

756 S.W.2d 945 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 1988

Brown has not appeared on appeal to contend otherwise. Brown’s motion to dismiss was erroneously sustained. Empire Gas Corporation does contend the petition was properly dismissed. … Blades v. Cinder Block Co., 10 S.W.2d 319 , 320 (Mo.App.1928). Also see Aman Collection Service, Inc. v. Burgess, 612 S.W.2d 405 (Mo.App.1981); Martin v. Signal Dodge, Inc., 444 S.W.2d 29 (Mo.App.1969); Orona v.

Gamble v. Browning

277 S.W.3d 723 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Dec 2, 2008

, Missouri, police officers, and numerous former and current members of the Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners. … The Gambles have dismissed their claims against the police board defendants, and they are not parties on this appeal.

Shapiro v. Columbia Union National Bank & Trust Co.

576 S.W.2d 310 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 18, 1978

He relies on Chamberlain v. Brown, 223 Tenn. 25 , 442 S.W.2d 248 (Tenn.1969) and Beauregard v. Wingard, 230 F.Supp. 167, 185 (S.D.Cal. 1964). … Brown, 270 F.Supp. 782 (E.D.Pa.1967); Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v.

Muhammad v. State

755 S.W.2d 15 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Aug 2, 1988

Board of President of the St. Louis Public Schools v. Walker

40 Mo. 383 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 15, 1867

As between the parties, a patent upon a confirmation by the old board relates back to the filing of the claim as the inception of the title—Landes v. Brant, 10 How. (U. S.) 343. … The subsequent legislation, according to the decision in Menard’s Heirs v. Massey, 8 How. (U. S.) 293, and in Cabanné v. Walker, 31 Mo. 274 , and Papin v.

Rasse v. City of Marshall Municipal Utilities, Board of Public Works

136 S.W.3d 546 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 22, 2004

Louis Rasse appeals the Board of Public Works’ decision affirming the City of Marshall Municipal Utilities’ assessment of wastewater treatment service charges against him for sewer usage at his residence. We affirm.

State ex rel. Goodman v. St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners

181 S.W.3d 156 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Nov 1, 2005

Hunter v. Lippold, 142 S.W.3d 241, 242 (Mo.App. W.D.2004). … LaRocca v. LaRocca, 135 S.W.3d 522, 524 (Mo.App. E.D.2004).

Rosenberg v. Shostak

405 S.W.3d 8 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 12, 2013

Highfill v. Hale, 186 S.W.3d 277, 280 (Mo. banc 2006). “Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, is used to preclude the relitigation of an issue that already has been decided in a different cause of action.” Brown v. … Johns v. Kays, 181 S.W.3d 565, 566 (Mo. banc 2006). 4 A party may assert collateral es-toppel offensively or defensively. Brown, 370 S.W.3d at 659 .

Liddell v. BOARD OF EDUC. OF CITY OF ST. LOUIS

771 F. Supp. 1496 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Aug 30, 1991

771 F.Supp. 1496 (1991) Craton LIDDELL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, et al., Defendants. No. 72-100 C (5). United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D. … Kenneth V. Byrne, Schlueter & Byrne, St. Louis, Mo., for Valley Park. Dr. Robert Bartman, Com'r, Mo. Dept. of Elementary & Secondary Educ., Jefferson City, Mo., for Mo. Dept. of Elementary & Secondary Educ. Edward J.

Spalding v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad

101 Mo. App. 225 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 31, 1903

There is a board on the right hand side in the hallway going into the train dispatcher’s office. I saw on this board three No. 72’s and two or three, two and maybe three, 70’s and one 78. … R. v. Tyson, 46 Miss. l. c. 738-9; Hackett v. B., C. & M. R. R., 35 N. H. 390; Johnson v. Strader & Thompson, 3 Mo. 359 ; Redmon v. C., R. I. & P. R’y Co., 90 Mo. App. 68 .

Fischer v. Browne

586 S.W.2d 733 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jul 31, 1979

Browne then filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, No. 676763, “Hobert W. Fischer v. … Browne then filed a subsequent action, No. 707638, “Hobert W. Fischer v.

Moss v. Kauffman

131 Mo. 424 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 3, 1895

Sturgeon v. Hampton, 88 Mo. 203 ; Railroad v. Hatton, 102 Mo. 45 ; Railroad v. Wayne County, 125 Mo. 351 . … Allen et al. v. Brown et al.; of State ex rel. Board of Education v. Ann R. Allen et al.; and of State ex rel. W. K. Chander, Prosecuting Attorney of Bollinger County v.

Affolder v. New York, C. & St. LR Co.

79 F. Supp. 365 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Jul 28, 1948

He had almost reached the car which he intended to board at the time of his fall. … Co. v. Brown, 6 Cir., 1933, 63 F.2d 657, 658 , where judgment for plaintiff was affirmed. In the Brown case the suit was brought under the Safety Appliance Act. Plaintiff was a brakeman employed by the defendant.

Brumm v. Bert Bell N.F.L. Retirement Plan

802 F. Supp. 258 · District Court, W.D. Missouri · Sep 18, 1992

The Board also considered Dr. Browning’s March 1985 reports, the December 1984 report by Dr. Darnell, and a May 20, 1985 report by K.H. Reesé, a psychologist. … See Cox v.

State ex rel. Ziegenhein v. Spencer

114 Mo. 574 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 14, 1893

Wickham v. Page, 49 Mo. 526 ; Laughlin v. Fairbanks, 8 Mo. 370 ; Brown v. Weatherby, 71 Mo. 152 ; George v. Middough, 62 Mo. 549 ; State ex rel. v. Board, 18 S. W. Rep. 782 . … Abbott v. Lindenbower, 42 Mo. 162 ; State v. Board, supra.

State Ex Rel. Claudia Lee & Associates, Inc. v. Board of Zoning Adjustment

297 S.W.3d 107 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Oct 27, 2009

Standard of Review When reviewing a Board decision on the merits, this court independently reviews the decision of the Board and not the judgment of the trial court. State ex. rel. Teefey v. … Lee argues that the issue cannot be mooted by the passage, after the Board’s decision, of a new zoning ordinance. Lee says Eubanks v.

Cox v. Sayad

647 S.W.2d 884 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jan 25, 1983

Milani v. Miller, 515 S.W.2d 412, 416 (Mo.1974). As this court stated in Plodzien v. … The reports themselves were competent and substantial evidence to support the Board’s express finding that appellant’s reports were contradictory and that therefore one of them must have been false. Compare Brown v.