Case law

Mercantile Bank National Ass'n v. Berra

796 S.W.2d 22 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Sep 11, 1990

Louis, naming as defendants the Board, the city, the Assessor and the Collector of Revenue. … United States Bank v.

State Ex Rel. Thompson v. Bethards

320 Mo. 1164 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 2, 1928

It is not conclusive on either the County Board nor on the State Board. The respondent refers to Boonville National Bank v. Schlotzhauer, 298 S. W. 732 . … The entire proceeding of the County Board in the matter was of no effect. [Trust Company v. Schramm, 269 Mo. 489 .] III.

Wechsler v. Davis

209 Mo. App. 570 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 20, 1922

[See, also Thomasson v. Ins. Co., 114 Mo. App. 109, 115 ; Harrison v. Murphy, supra.] … [Brown v. Ins. Co., 228 S. W. 883 .]

APAC-Missouri, Inc. v. Boyer

420 S.W.3d 651 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Oct 30, 2013

Lezah Stenger Homes, Inc., 321 S.W.3d 488, 492-93 (Mo.App.S.D.2010) (quoting Brown v. Brown, 14 S.W.3d 704 , 708 n. 5 (Mo.App.S.D.2000)). … “It is not the trial court’s function to help counsel try their cases[,]” State v. Brown, 996 S.W.2d 719, 733 (Mo.App.W.D. 1999), and we “will not accept counsel’s statements as a substitute for record proof.”

State v. Coleman

441 S.W.2d 46 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Apr 14, 1969

In State v. … In Dixon v.

Air Evac EMS, Inc. v. Goodman

883 S.W.2d 71 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Aug 5, 1994

Brown v. Mercantile Bank of Poplar Bluff, 820 S.W.2d 327, 334 [2] (Mo.App.1991). DISCUSSION AND DECISION Air Evae’s only theory of recovery is an action on account. … Brokaw v. Board of Education, 171 S.W.2d 75 , 85[18] (Mo.App.1943). This we will not do. See In Re Marriage of Dubois, 875 S.W.2d 223, 226 [2] (Mo.App.1994).

State v. Williams

473 S.W.2d 388 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 13, 1971

Defendant cites and relies on Ward v. Goodwin, Mo., 345 S.W.2d 215 , and State ex rel. Arbeiter v. Reagan, Mo., 427 S.W.2d 371 . … As a general rule a witness may be impeached by showing that he made a prior inconsistent statement as to a material matter, State v.

State Ex Rel. Conran v. Duncan

333 Mo. 673 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Aug 23, 1933

According to the returns of the election and the certificate of the canvassing board, Conran was nominated. … [Gantt v. Brown, 244 Mo. 271, 301 , 149 S. W. 644, 646 , Ann. Cas. 1913D, 1283.]

Wright v. Kenney

746 S.W.2d 626 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 1988

Bigg v. Hart, 255 S.W. 2d 778 (Mo.1953). However, a motion for a directed verdict is inappropriate in a court-tried case. Board of Public Utilities v. Fenton, 669 S.W.2d 612 (Mo.App.1984). … Marrs v. Marrs, 628 S.W.2d 950 (Mo.App.1982); Cave v. Cave, 593 S.W.2d 592 (Mo.App.1979); Moser v. Williams, 443 S.W.2d 212 (Mo.App.1969).

Ross v. Robb

662 S.W.2d 257 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Dec 20, 1983

Ross v. Robb, 651 S.W.2d 680 (Mo.App.1983). … In Thompson v.

The Parkview Vale, LLC and The Alma, LLC v. Board of Zoning Adjustment for the City of Kansas City, Missouri

Missouri Court of Appeals · Mar 9, 2021

Church v. … Wennihan v. Wennihan, 452 S.W.3d 723, 728 (Mo. App. W.D. 2015).

Veal v. Leimkuehler

249 S.W.2d 491 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 20, 1952

V, § 3. … V, § 3.

State of Missouri v. Christopher D. Robertson

Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 2023

State v. Brown, 596 S.W.3d 193, 208 (Mo. App. W.D. 2020) (emphasis original). … See Brown, 596 S.W.3d at 208.

Gronoway v. Markham

232 Mo. App. 1118 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 1938

Brown and Jennings. “Q. Brown and Jennings? A. Yes, sir. “Q. Was that Brown this Brown that is a partner in Markham & Brown? A. Yes, sir. ‘ ‘ Q. He was there too ? A. Yes, sir. “Q. Well, did he say anything? A. … When, in conformity to the law as declared in the opinion in Greenfielder v. Whitte Hardware Co., 189 Mo. App. 577 , and the law as declared in the opinion in Hunicke v.

Warren v. Lombardo's Enterprises, Inc.

706 S.W.2d 286 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Feb 4, 1986

In Meadows v. … The case now before us presents essentially the same fact situation present in Meadows and for the same reasons the petition does not establish a duty by the landowner. 1 Plaintiffs rely upon Brown v.

Graves v. City of Joplin

48 S.W.3d 121 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 2001

Jones v. City of Jennings, 23 S.W.3d 801, 803 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). … See Macon-Atlanta State Bank v. Gall, 666 S.W.2d 934, 940 (Mo.App.

State v. Mays

598 S.W.2d 613 · Missouri Court of Appeals · Apr 29, 1980

State v. Keeney, 425 S.W.2d 85, 89 (Mo.1968). … State v. Cook, supra, at p. 325; State v. Timmons, 574 S.W.2d 950, 956 (Mo.App. 1978).

Lombardo v. Lombardo

992 S.W.2d 919 · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 25, 1999

v. … Brown v. Brown, 673 S.W.2d 113, 114 (Tex.App. — El.Paso 1984), lists two articles by Oldham which are cited as 20 J. Fam. L. 615 (1982), and 17 J.. Fam. L. 249 (1979). Brownaho lists cases from other jurisdictions.

Snell v. Owens

3 Mo. 225 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Sep 15, 1833

In the case of’ Brown v. … But in that case Brown had offered to file sufficient bond, before the motion to dismiss was made. We cannot indulge suitors farther.

Edwards v. Gerstein

237 S.W.3d 580 · Supreme Court of Missouri · Oct 30, 2007

Louis v. Mummert, 875 S.W.2d 553, 555 (Mo. banc 1994). … BJC Health System v. Neill, 121 S.W.3d 528, 529 (Mo. banc 2003).