Gunnison Props., LLC v. Daugherty, 517 S.W.3d 636 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017). · Go Syfert
Search
Gunnison Props., LLC v. Daugherty, 517 S.W.3d 636 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: State v. Murphy (moctapp, 2017-11-28)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Murphy
Mo. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
“A trial court abuses .its discretion only if its decision to admit or exclude evidence is clearly against the logic. of the circumstance then before the court and is so unreasonable and arbitrary that it shocks the sense of justice and indicates a lack of careful, deliberate consideration.” State v. Christopher, 517 S.W.3d 636, 644-45 (Mo. App. W.D. 2017).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
GUNNISON PROPERTIES, LLC
v.
Phyllis DAUGHERTY
No. ED 104466.
Missouri Court of Appeals.
Apr 11, 2017.
517 S.W.3d 636
2017 WL 1327127
2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 290
Kathryn B. David, Davis & Travaglini, LLC, St. Louis, MO, for Respondent., Elbert A. Walton, Jr., Metro Law Firm, LLC, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.
Hoff, III, Lisa.
Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Phyllis Daugherty appeals from the trial court’s Order and Judgment (“Judgment”) granting possession of her property to Gunnison Properties, LLC (“Gunnison”) on Gunnison’s ejectment action. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. The Judgment was not void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the Judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).