 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Johnson v. State, WD 64770,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, May 2, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to reopen a post-conviction proceeding under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 24.035 (2004) was properly denied without an evidentiary hearing because there was no showing of abandonment where post-conviction counsel filed an amended motion and incorporated the inmate's pro se motion by reference; ineffective assistance of counsel was not cognizable.
|
|||||
| Kader v. Shepherd, No. ED86407,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, May 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Little v. State, No. ED86811,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, May 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Mason v. State, WD 65329,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, May 2, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court affirmed judgment denying appellant's Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 29.15 motion for postconviction relief, based on allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, where he did not establish any prejudice resulting from counsel's failure to request that appellant be sentenced to a term of years with placement in an alcohol treatment program.
|
|||||
| McCay v. McCay, No. ED86789,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, May 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| McLaughlin v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., No. ED86783,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Murray v. Kempker, WD 65651,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, WESTERN DISTRICT, May 2, 2006, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Netco, Inc. v. Dunn, No. SC86855,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI, May 2, 2006, Decided , May 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dispute between corporations and a distributorship and its distributors, the trial court erred in finding that corporation one could be bound to arbitrations as the mere fact that it had a mutually beneficial relationship with corporation two did not make it a third-party beneficiary of the distributorship agreements.
|
|||||
| Nitro Distrib., Inc. v. Dunn, No. SC86854,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI, May 2, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An appellee in a dispute between Amway-related business supporters, whose president signed an arbitration agreement, was bound to arbitrate any claims it brought against other signatories to the agreement under Mo. Rev. Stat. 435.355; claims that involved nonsignatories were not bound by the arbitration clause.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
