Case law

State Ex Rel. Massman v. Bland

355 Mo. 17 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 8, 1946

On this respondent cites, among others, the following cases: Koewing v. Greene County B. L. Assn., 327 Mo. 680 , 38 S. W. (2d) 40 ; J. A. Fay & Egan Co. v. Brown Machinery Co. (Mo. App.), 14 S. … [Fay & Egan v. Brown, supra.] For independent proof of agency, respondent relies on what he terms admissions contained in Massman’s deposition.

Dave McNeill v. City of Kansas City, MO

459 S.W.3d 509 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 28, 2015

Johnson v. Merchants' & Miners' Bank, 213 S.W. 815, 818 (Mo. banc 1919), the Supreme Court observed that, where "'a board of special and limited powers . . . steps outside of its jurisdiction[,] its acts are void.'" … In Brown v. Color Coating, Inc., 867 S.W.2d 242, 244 (Mo.

Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. of Missouri v. Anderson

360 S.W.2d 314 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 18, 1962

Co. of New York v. … Corporation v.

State v. Scroggs

521 S.W.3d 649 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 2017

In early June of 2013, Brown took the three children to visit Pleasant Hill. Brown noticed that Scroggs appeared to be pregnant. … Brown received a call from Matthew on November 4, 2013, requesting that Brown come to his home. When Brown arrived, Matthew looked like he had not slept and was exhausted, as if he were “crashing.”

State v. Everhart

316 Mo. 195 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 20, 1926

To the same effect are Burghart v. Brown, 51 Mo. 600 ; Howard v. Newsom, 5 Mo. 523 ; Reevs v. Hardy, 7 Mo. 348 ; Lyon v. Batz, 42 Mo. App. 606 ; Mann v. Weiss, 185 Mo. App. 335 , l. c. 345. … [Kinlen v. Railroad, 216 Mo. l. c. 173; Pennington v. Railway Co., 201 Mo. App. l. c. 487; Jackson v. Kansas City Rys. Co., 232 S. W. (Mo.) 752.]

Hayes v. State

711 S.W.2d 876 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Jul 15, 1986

Our holding is consistent with State v. … The prosecutor’s deposition testimony, indeed, is quite consistent with Brown’s testimony. . See United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97, 96 S.Ct. 2392 , 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976); State v.

Rogers v. Rogers

430 S.W.2d 305 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jul 5, 1968

The organization is governed by an eight-man board of dir *307 ectors. Prospective members, if approved by the board, may join the order, or they may enter on a provisional basis for 13 months. … Edgar v. Fitzpatrick, Mo., 377 S.W.2d 314, 318 [12]; Brown v. Montgomery, 354 Mo. 1041, 1050-1051 , 193 S.W. 2d 23, 27 [3]; Niedt v. American Ry. Express Co., Mo.App., 6 S.W.2d 973 [1].

City of Harrisonville v. Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources and Board of Trustees for the Petroleum Storage Tank Insurance Fund.

Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 2023

See Laut v. … Li Lin v.

Berry v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.

124 Mo. 223 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 5, 1894

Wilson v. Board of Education, 63 Mo. 137 ; Charles v. Patch, 87 Mo. 450 ; Noeninger v. Vogt, 88 Mo. 589 . … Hipsley v. Railroad, 88 Mo. 348 ; Brown v. Railroad, 13 Mo. App. 462 ; Sappington v. Railroad, 14 Mo. App. 86 ; Kenney v. Railroad, 80 Mo. 573 ; Wise v. Railroad , 85 Mo. 178 .

Boehmer v. Boggiano

412 S.W.2d 103 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Feb 13, 1967

Hufft v. Kuhn, Mo., 277 S.W.2d 552 . In that case, and also in Brown v. Moore, Mo., 248 S.W.2d 553 , Ulrich v. Kiefer, Mo.App., 90 S.W.2d *111 140, and Boschert v. … In Brown v. Moore, Mo., 248 S.W.2d 553 , at loc. cit. 559, the Court said: “We must keep in mind that the question of the amount of damages is primarily for the jury.

Jones v. Nichols

280 Mo. 653 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 20, 1919

"It is as much to your interest as mine," Brown said. And Brown further said: "You will have an interest in the place." That was all of the conversation he had with Brown. … Brown and Ragland, CC., concur.

Luebbering Oil Co. v. Ozark Truck Plaza Inc.

883 S.W.2d 558 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 14, 1994

Corn v. Holloway, 814 S.W.2d 319, 320 (Mo.App.1991); see also Byrd v. Brown, 641 S.W.2d 163, 165 (Mo.App.1982); Byrd v. Brown, 613 S.W.2d 695, 698-99 (Mo.App.1981), and cases cited therein under n. 3. … Warner, 707 S.W.2d 448, 449 (Mo.App.1986); Byrd v. Brown, 641 S.W.2d at 167 . This court has no choice but to dismiss the appeals. Gurwit v. Kannatzer, supra; Gothard v. Spradling, 561 S.W.2d 448, 449 (Mo.App.1978).

Esmar v. Haeussler

234 Mo. App. 217 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 5, 1938

[Markhan v. Jaudon, 41 N. Y. 235 ; Brown v. Warren, 43 New Hamp. 430; Providence Thread Co. v. Aldrich, 12 R. I. 77; Story on Bailments, section 297.]” *229 “The law seeks substance not forms. … [Citing Horton v. Morgan, 19 N. Y. 170 ; Rogers v. Thomson, 215 App. Div. 541 ; Zimmerman v. Weber, 135 App. Div. 428 ; Harding v. Field, 1 App. Div. 391 ; Banta v.

City of Harrisonville v. Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources and Board of Trustees for the Petroleum Storage Tank Insurance Fund

Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 19, 2023

The Fund Board intervened, and both parties filed motions for summary judgment. … Storey v. State, 175 S.W.3d 116, 126 (Mo. banc 2005); see also Fowler v. Mo. Sheriffs' Ret.

In Re the Marriage of Bradford

557 S.W.2d 720 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Oct 25, 1977

In re Marriage of Banners, 549 S.W.2d 941, 942 [2] (Mo.App.1977); Fulton v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 528 S.W.2d 466, 469 [3] (Mo.App.1975); Askew v. Brown, 450 S.W.2d 446, 450 [2-5] (Mo.App.1970). … McDougal v. McDougal, supra, 279 S.W.2d at 739-740 . Neither of the precedents cited aids the respondent here. The Louisiana decree, as noted, recites on its face that it is a decree of separation from bed and board.

Bruce v. Vogel

38 Mo. 100 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Mar 15, 1866

Garesché and Brown assigned their judgments to. one Prince, and Prince’s attorney caused an execution to be issued on the Brown judgment on the 18th day of July, 1863, with directions to the sheriff to levy on and sell the … This case is precisely in point with the one under consideration, and has been repeatedly followed—Waterman v. Haskin, 11 Johns. 228 Michales v. Boyd, 1 Carter Ind., 259; Rockhill v. Hanna, 15 How., U. S. 189; Smith v.

Ex parte Reno

66 Mo. 266 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 15, 1877

Commonwealth v. Halloway, 44 Penn. St. 218. … The principal announced above, as to the effect of the Secretary’s failure to enter the act of the Governor in his register, is analogous to that declared is the case of Scruggs v.

State v. Waghalter

177 Mo. 676 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 17, 1903

V. Brown, the detective who operated at East St. … [Speiden v. The State, 3 Tex. App. 156; People v. Collins, 53 Cal. 185 ; Allen v. The State, 40 Ala. 334 ; People v. McCord, 76 Mich. 200 ; Connor v. People, 18 Col. 373 ; Dodge v. Brittain, Meigs (Tenn.) 84; Zink v.

State v. Kaiser

124 Mo. 651 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Nov 20, 1894

State v. Gilmore, 110 Mo. 1 ; State v. Day, 100 Mo. 242 , and cases there cited. II. … . - This case is readily dis *668 tinguishable from State v. Brown, 64 Mo. 371 . State v. Walker, 78 Mo. 388 ; State v. Day, 100 Mo. 242 .

State v. Regot

172 S.W.3d 485 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Sep 27, 2005

State v. Westfall, 75 S.W.3d 278, 280 (Mo. banc 2002). A trial court does not err by refusing to submit an instruction that has no basis in the evidence. State v. Wilson, 105 S.W.3d 576, 586 (Mo.App. S.D.2003); State v. … Brown and/or Ms. Seymore were unable to receive information. The case of State v. Hirt, 16 S.W.3d 628 (Mo.App. W.D.2000) is instructive on this point.