 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Hart v. Hart, WD 66278,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 9, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A finding in favor of the wife in the parties' dissolution action was proper because the property was divided appropriately under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 452.330.1. The husband failed to meet his burden of overcoming the presumptions in favor of the trial court's decision regarding the division of property and the wife's non-teacher retirement fund.
|
|||||
| In re Lim, No. SC87849,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney's letter to his client was effort to coerce payment by withholding labor certification, a document to which the client was entitled, in violation of Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 4-1.16(d). There was not a preponderance of evidence establishing violations of Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 4-1.6(a), 4-1.9, or 4-7.5, and a public reprimand of the attorney was ordered.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of C.W., No. SC88049,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The termination of the mother's parental rights was improper because the circuit court erred in not ordering an investigation and social study after the filing of the petition as required by Mo. Rev. Stat. § 211.455. Further, the juvenile office failed to establish grounds for termination or that termination was in the child's best interest.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of T.M., No. ED87911,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, NORTHERN DIVISION, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Klietheremes v. ABB Power T&D, WD 66700,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 9, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Based on lack of an immediate response, Missouri Labor and Industrial Relations Commission believed a doctor who stated that there was no causal connection between the electric shock a claimant received and his worsening heart condition. Thus, denial of workers' compensation benefits was proper, Mo. Const. art. V, § 18; Mo. Rev. Stat. § 287.495.1.
|
|||||
| Laws v. St. Luke's Hosp., WD66564,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 9, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a medical negligence suit, JNOV was improperly granted as expert stated that surgeon breached standard of care by failing to communicate properly with anesthesiologists about when patient should be extubated. But, he was entitled to new trial, Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 78.02, as he presented contrary substantial evidence that he had met standard of care.
|
|||||
| M.R.C. v. Juvenile Officer, WD 66989,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 9, 2007, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| M.T. v. Lentz (In re N.L.B.), No. SC87291,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI, January 9, 2007, Filed, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Adoption of child based on Mo. Rev. Stat. § 453.030 had to be reversed where father timely intervened in proceeding and trial court should have permitted all evidence pertaining to the welfare of the child. Pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. § 453.040(7), finding that father willfully abandoned child for at least six months was not supported by evidence.
|
|||||
| Meissner v. Schnettgoecke, No. ED87883,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not have the authority to modify provisions of a separation agreement incorporated in a divorce decree under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 452.330.5 to substitute a $20,000 withdrawal from a pension plan for the same withdrawal from a 401(k); the agreement did not express an intent to create a QDRO to give the husband an interest in the 401(k).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
