LexisNexis
  

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.


   State Courts - Missouri - April 19 - April 24, 2006

  
Cook v. State, No. 26981, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION I, April 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Pursuant to Sixth Amendment, plea counsel was not ineffective in hiring psychologist to evaluate inmate to determine whether or not he was suffering from mental disease or defect and to ascertain his mental capabilities, and in hiring sex offender counselor to evaluate him and provide alternatives and recommendations as to disposition of his case.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
McMains v. McMains, No. 26999, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, April 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Appellate court affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of an insurer in a passenger's claim for damages under the insurer's uninsured motorist coverage because since the passenger obtained a settlement with the insurance company for the other car in involved in the accident, there was no uninsured vehicle that triggered coverage.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Finney v. Nat'l Healthcare Corp., No. 26971, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION I, April 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: In a daughter's suit against a nursing home for the wrongful death of her mother, denial of the nursing home's motion to compel arbitration based on an arbitration clause in the mother's contract with the nursing home when she was first admitted was proper as the daughter was not a party to the original contract and thus not bound by the clause.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Hill v. State, No. 26690, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, April 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: In a murder case, the trial court did not err by not granting movant a hearing upon his sua sponte Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 29.15 motion to inquire into an abandonment by his appointed counsel as the abandonment claim was nothing more than a claim of ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel, which was categorically unreviewable.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
State v. Green, No. 26967, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT DIVISION II, April 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Defendant's appeal from his possession of marijuana with intent to distribute conviction was dismissed as the record clearly showed that defendant voluntarily waived his right to appeal in exchange for the State's recommendation that he receive the minimum sentence under the charged offense.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. As One, Inc., No. 26906, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, April 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Overview: Summary judgment was improperly granted in favor of insurer where there were genuine issues of material fact whether employee hired by insured was a temporary worker as defined by the policy; there were issues as to whether the employee was hired for a finite period of time and whether he was hired to support or supplement a special work situation.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Back to Top
  

  www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us
  Copyright© 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.