 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Howard v. State, No. ED87956,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, February 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Donaldson, No. SC87569,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI, February 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 632.492 and 632.495 did not require dismissal of petition to determine that respondent was a sexually violent predator simply because order of continuance was not entered within 90 days because there was no allegation that respondent was substantially prejudiced, and trial court continued case due to administration of justice.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of A.T., No. ED88443,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, February 13, 2007, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Knob Noster R-VIII Sch. Dist. v. Dankenbring, WD66923,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, February 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not err in finding that contractual clauses did not preclude recovery against the subcontractor in a subrogation action for the sum expended by an insurer for roof repairs because the property insurance obtained did not provide coverage for damage to the roof. The school district's claim for damage to the roof was not barred.
|
|||||
| Kowalskey v. State, No. ED87520,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, February 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| L.J.D. v. B.L.G., WD 66943,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, February 13, 2007, Decided , February 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lumley v. Crawford, WD 66664,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, February 13, 2007, Decided , February 13, 2007, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Martin v. State, WD 67043,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, February 13, 2007, Decided , February 13, 2007, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Murrell v. State (In re Murrell), No. SC87804,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI, February 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Missouri's Sexually Violent Predator statute, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 632.480-632.513, complied with constitutional due process requirements because it required jury to find appellant presently posed a danger to society if released, and statutory scheme provided for annual examination of appellant's mental health condition, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 632.498.1(2).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
