 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Gant v. State, WD 65810,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 23, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a drug trafficking case, denial of defendant's motion for postconviction relief under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 29.15 was clearly erroneous as his counsel was constitutionally deficient by seeking testimony that advanced the State's position during the suppression hearing where the State submitted insufficient evidence to prove probable cause to arrest.
|
|||||
| Gerlach v. Adair, WD66363,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 23, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: By failing to find presumed correct child support amount (PCCSA), trial court did not comply with procedure used to determine child support award, Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 88.01, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 452.340; thus, finding that mother owed no child support to father was reversed and remanded to find PCCSA and then consider if award was unjust and inappropriate.
|
|||||
| Glasgow v. State, WD 65948,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 23, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel was not ineffective, Sixth Amendment, for failing to renew an objection to a venireperson's comments because they did not speak to appellant's prior possible history of drug use, incarceration, or bad conduct; they merely insinuated that appellant had contact with the venireperson's ex-son-in-law, who was incarcerated and used drugs.
|
|||||
| Golden Delta Enters., L.L.C. v. US Bank, No. ED 87364,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, January 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in finding that the home equity deed of trust lost priority when the balance was reduced to zero because the instrument fully complied with the version of Mo. Rev. Stat. § 443.055 in effect at the time of the home equity deed of trust's execution.
|
|||||
| Hagan v. Buchanan, WD 66070,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 23, 2007, Decided , January 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of motion to set aside default judgment was affirmed because the one-year clock under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 74.05(d) began to run when the default judgment was "entered," not when the judgment became "final" due to an unserved defendant being dismissed.
|
|||||
| Hawkins v. Planned Indus. Expansion Auth., WD 66563,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 23, 2007, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Przada, No. ED87826,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, January 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Jones v. State, No. 27423,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, January 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant sought relief, pursuant to Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 24.035, contending that had his attorneys explained what "life without parole" meant, he would not have entered guilty plea. Trial court did not err in denying request as attorneys testified they explained what term meant and appellate court was not left with impression mistake had been made.
|
|||||
| Kelly v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., WD 66408,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, January 23, 2007, Decided , January 23, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment in favor of the employees entered against the insurance company, their prior employer, was reversed because the trial court should have granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict on all of the claims on which the jury found in favor of the employees, because the agency agreements were clearly terminable at-will by either party.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
