 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Hamer v. Nicholas, WD 65183,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, March 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a father's motion to modify custody, the trial court erred in finding that no substantial change in the circumstances of the child as per Mo. Rev. Stat. § 452.410.1 as the child had developed a significant bed-wetting problem, was allegedly spanked and demeaned by the mother's husband, and was fearful of the husband's threats of using his gun.
|
|||||
| Healthstyle Prods. Int'l, Inc. v. Union Planters Bank, No. ED86371,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was no evidence that the corporation signed an amendment to an agreement between the bank and the corporation's subsidiary that would make the corporation liable for the subsidiary's default on the bank loans; thus, under the Statute of Frauds, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 432.010, bank could not obtain corporation's funds to satisfy subsidiary's debts.
|
|||||
| Hess v. Chase Manhattan Bank USA, N.A., WD 64370 (Consolidated with WD 64407),
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, March 28, 2006, Decided , March 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in dismissing home buyer's nondisclosure claim against seller bank because it should have retrospectively applied Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.025.1 (amended 2000), which authorized a private cause of action in real estate transactions and punitive damages. Section 407.025.1 was procedural and did not impose any new obligations on bank.
|
|||||
| Howard Constr. Co. v. Bentley Trucking, Inc., WD 64848,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, March 28, 2006, Decided , March 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A purchaser of concrete sand was not entitled to a jury instruction on the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 400.2-315 (2000) because there was no showing that the purchaser intended to use the sand for anything other than its ordinary purpose, which was to make concrete.
|
|||||
| Hudson v. State, WD 64725,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, March 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion court did not err in denying defendant's Mo. Rev. Stat. § 547.035 post-conviction motion for DNA testing as it failed to allege that evidence sought to be tested was secured in relation to the crimes; defendant did not allege facts that reasonable probability existed that he would not have been convicted given DNA testing of cigarette butt.
|
|||||
| Jensen v. Mo. Dep't of Health & Senior Servs., WD65158,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, March 28, 2006, Decided , March 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Missouri's Personal Care Assistance program requirements as to unmet need and undue hardship conflicted with federal law, including 42 U.S.C.S. § 1396a(a)(17)(D), to the extent that they considered family resources of adult aid recipients, and those requirements were thus preempted; reduction of recipient's benefits based on requirements was error.
|
|||||
| K.K.G. v. M.A.G., WD65843,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, March 28, 2006, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Martin v. State, No. ED85959,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conduct constituted forcible stealing pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. § 569.020. Defendant took knife from victim and held it to the victim's throat, which was sufficient to show he used knife in threatening manner under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 556.061. Trial court advised defendant of maximum sentence of plea under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 24.02(b).
|
|||||
| Mays v. Div. of Empl. Sec., WD 65243,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, March 28, 2006, Order 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. |
