 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Peoples v. ESI Mail Pharm. Servs., No. ED87565,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Claimant was properly disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits because there was substantial evidence under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 288.210 that the claimant's actions in sending wrong prescriptions to customers of his employer met the statutory definition of "misconduct" under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 288.030.1.
|
|||||
| Saigh v. Saigh, ED88098,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trust company was not entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs' breach of fiduciary duty and negligence claims because there were issues of fact as to whether, by failing to investigate the necessity of spending over $ 1,200,000 on renovating the beneficiary's residence, the company exercised reasonable care in the administration of the trust.
|
|||||
| Sitelines, L.L.C. v. Pentstar Corp., No. ED88579,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, February 6, 2007, Decided , February 6, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 44.01(d), court did not err in denying subcontractor's motion to compel arbitration; its notice of hearing of motion to compel arbitration sent by fax less than 24 hours before filing motion clearly was not reasonable as it did not give contractor reasonable time to respond to the motion or prepare for a hearing thereon.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Dir. of Revenue, WD 66272,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, February 6, 2007, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State ex inf. Sanders ex rel. City of Lee's Summit v. City of Lake Lotawana, WD 66758,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an annexation dispute, a first city's petition to annex land did not comply with Mo. Rev. Stat. § 71.012 where it was not properly verified; an acknowledgment by means of a notarization was not sufficient, and the first city was not permitted to use relation back to cure this deficiency since the verification was statutorily required.
|
|||||
| State v. Canton, No. ED87527,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Robinson, No. ED87658,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| TBF Fin., L.L.C. v. Stone, No. 27357,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a leasing company's suit against a customer for default under an equipment lease, the trial court erred in rendering judgment in the customer's favor as the customer failed to answer the company's Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 59 requests, and the Rule 59 admissions offered by the company established at least a prima facie case against the customer.
|
|||||
| Viacom Outdoor, Inc. v. St. Louis Supermarkets, Inc., No. ED87293,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, February 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
