1.190. Notices, how served. — Whenever any of the statutes of this state require or imply that a notice shall be given to any person concerning or affecting any right, property, claim, duty, matter or thing of any character or nature, unless the statutes expressly direct a different method of service, the delivery of a true copy of the notice to the person intended to be notified, or the leaving of a copy at his usual place of abode with some member of his family over the age of fifteen years, constitutes a valid and sufficient service of the notice.
Notes of Decisions
Wolf v. Missouri State Training Sch. for Boys, 517 S.W.2d 138 (Mo. 1974).
· cites it 9× “However, § 1.190 provides as follows: "Whenever any of the statutes of this state require or imply that a notice shall be given to any person concerning or affecting any right, property, claim, duty, matter or thing of any character or nature, unless the statutes expressly…”
Johnson v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm'n, 591 S.W.2d 241 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 10× “The only question raised is whether or not § 1.190, RSMo 1978 1 requires personal service on each of the claimants of the deputy’s determination finding them disqualified for benefits.”
Parsons Constr. Co. v. Missouri Pub. Serv. Co., 425 S.W.2d 166 (Mo. 1968).
· cites it 3× “Defendant alleged that “it had no duty to the plaintiff” to remove or relocate its lines because the Commission had not properly served it, in the manner provided by Section 1.190 RSMo 1959 [V.A.M.S.], with the notice required by Section 227.”
GAC Credit Corp. v. Small Bus. Admin., 323 F. Supp. 795 (W.D. Mo. 1971).
· cites it 3× “9-312 because (1) another Missouri statutory section, § 1.190, requires that written notice be given, and (2) that the description “R.”
Himmel v. Leimkuehler, 329 S.W.2d 264 (Mo. Ct. App. 1959).
· cites it 3× “To *270 compel the Board to determine the record owners of each parcel of land in the block and to serve each in the manner provided by section 1.190 RSMo 1949, supra, would be to effectively deny the Board any right to hold a hearing for the purpose of considering appeals.”
State Ex Rel. Murphy v. Aronson, 330 S.W.2d 140 (Mo. Ct. App. 1959).
· cites it 2× “However, relator points to the provisions of Section 1.190 R.S.Mo.1949 (1957 Supp. Laws of 1957, p.”
Quinn v. Graham, 428 S.W.2d 178 (Mo. Ct. App. 1968).
“§ 1.190 that “Whenever any of the statutes of this state require or imply that a notice shall be given to any person concerning or affecting any right, property, claim, duty, matter or thing of any character or nature, unless the statutes expressly direct a different method of…”
Cole Plastics v. Dep't of Labor & Indus. Relations, 606 S.W.2d 504 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 3× “banc 1974), a case involving the dismissal of a corrections officer, the court, in interpreting §§ 1.190 and 36.380, RSMo 1978, citing authority, held that where a statute does not specify the method for notice, personal service is required.”
Moellering Concrete, Inc. v. Doerr, 784 S.W.2d 864 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990).
“It was left with wife, as authorized by what is now § 1.190. Such notice and service were sufficient as to husband.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.