Kuenz v. Dir. of Revenue, 982 S.W.2d 817 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
Kuenz v. Dir. of Revenue, 982 S.W.2d 817 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Norman (moctapp, 2004-10-18)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
cited Cited as authority (rule) State v. Norman
Mo. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
“Testimony contrary to the court’s.ruling on a defendant’s motion in limine does not, in itself, require the declaration of a mistrial.” Webber at 322.
cited Cited "see" State v. Curtis Ely
Tenn. Crim. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Williams, 977 S.W.2d at 105 . 2 I would also disagree with the holding of a panel of our court in State v. Elder, 982 S.W.2d 817 (Tenn. Crim.
Bernard F. KUENZ
v.
DIRECTOR OF REVENUE
No. ED 74266.
Missouri Court of Appeals.
Dec 22, 1998.
982 S.W.2d 817
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Evan J. Buchheim, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for appellant., Timothy F. Devereux, Clayton, for respondent.
Gaertner, Hoff, Russell.
Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Director of Revenue (Director) appeals from the .judgment reinstating the driving privilege of Bernard Kuenz after Director suspended them pursuant to section 302.505, RSMo Cum.Supp.1997. We have reviewed the briefs and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).