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 - May 11 - May 15, 2006
	Ethridge v. Tierone Bank, No. 27016, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 11, 2006, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Where a married couple held property as tenants by the entirety, a deed of trust naming only the husband as grantor was ineffective to convey her interest in the property, but a summary judgment declaring the deed invalid was improper because wife had not demonstrated that the affirmative defense of equitable subrogation failed as a matter of law. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	McCullough v. McCullough, No. 27116, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 12, 2006, Filed View this case - free   Overview: The owners' appellate brief failed to comply with the requirements of Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 84.04, and failure to substantially comply with Rule 84.04 preserved nothing for review and warranted dismissal of an appeal. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Scott v. Union Planters Bank, N.A., No. 27154, COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSOURI, SOUTHERN DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, May 15, 2006, Filed View this case - free   Overview: A bank was not liable for allowing a wife to make a unilateral withdrawal of all money from a certificate of deposit because the clear and unambiguous language of an agreement signed by a husband permitted such action. 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.