Your MCP token and copy-and-paste setup for Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor and the rest are on
the install page — filled in with your real credentials while you are signed in.
Appearance
Delete my account: email
[email protected]
and it is done by hand, usually the same day. (Self-serve deletion is not built yet.)
Create a free account
Free, and it takes a minute. A syfert.com account skips the bot checks on search and case
pages, keeps your details and plan under the account icon, and comes with an MCP token for
Claude, ChatGPT or any MCP-capable assistant — emailed to you with setup instructions,
and always available under that icon.
(1960) Overruling of defendant's objection to reading of original circuit court record showing defendant's previous convictions and from original St. Louis City Workhouse records showing his sentences served and his discharges upheld against assignment that the evidence did not comply with requirements of Business Records Act as it was not the purpose of the act to exclude properly identified original instruments. State v. Washington (Mo.), 335 S.W.2d 23.
(1960) Testimony of witness, who was an employee of the coroner, as to autopsy upon the deceased, showing his death and the cause of the death, held admissible in evidence in criminal case under the business records as evidence law. State v. Lunsford (Mo.), 338 S.W.2d 868.
(1966) Opinions or reasons of planning commission recommending change in zoning of properties were not relevant to action for condemnation of land for highway purposes and the Uniform Business Records as Evidence Law did not make them admissible in evidence. State v. Koberna (Mo.), 396 S.W.2d 654.
(1975) Evidence which showed that records were kept of all bookings for various charges in the arrest register, that the records were kept in the ordinary course of business, that there is a time limit under which one can be confined without booking, and that witness was familiar with the manner in which arrest records were kept was sufficient to sustain admission of arrest register into evidence over defendant's objection that there was no evidence as to mode of preparation or that it was made at or near the time of recorded arrest. State v. Jones (A.), 518 S.W.2d 322.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 65
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1952–2024 · leading case: State v. Merritt, 591 S.W.2d 107 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979).
State v. Merritt, 591 S.W.2d 107 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 6דOver further objection, the report of chemist, Ed Hovey, was introduced into evidence pursuant to § 490.660, RSMo 1969, commonly referred to as “The Uniform Business Records as Evidence Law”.”
State v. Walkup, 220 S.W.3d 748 (Mo. 2007). · cites it 2ד, section 490.660 et seq. (admission of business records).”
Soper v. Bopp, 990 S.W.2d 147 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 4ד1 states: Any records or copies of records reproduced in the ordinary course of business by any photographic, photostatic, microfilm, micro-card, miniature photographic, optical disk imaging, or other process which accurately reproduces or forms a durable medium for so…”
C & W Asset Acquisition, LLC v. Somogyi, 136 S.W.3d 134 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2דthat would be admissible under sections 490.660 to 490.690 shall be admissible as a business record, subject to other substantive or procedural objections, in any court in this state upon the affidavit of the person who would otherwise provide the prerequisites of sections 490.”
Nichols v. Preferred Risk Grp., 44 S.W.3d 886 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2דThe decisions limiting the admissibility of what was told to an officer under The Uniform Business Records as Evidence Law, §§ 490.660 to 490.690, RSMo 1994, are applicable to reports that qualify as “official reports.”
State v. Wise, 879 S.W.2d 494 (Mo. 1994). “The state objected to introduction of the copy on foundation grounds, Business Records Act, § 490.660 to 490.690, RSMo 1986; § 490.692, RSMo Supp.”
Davolt v. Highland, 119 S.W.3d 118 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003). “Missouri’s “Uniform Business Records as Evidence Law,” sections 490.660 to 490.690, provides at section 490.”
State v. Copeland, 928 S.W.2d 828 (Mo. 1996). “§ 490.660, et seq. The sheriff further testified that he opened and inspected a letter sent from Faye Copeland by United States mañ to Ray Copeland, who was also in the jañ.”
Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC v. Juanita Schultz, Defendant/Respondent., 449 S.W.3d 427 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2דthat would be admissible under sections 490.660 to 490.690 shall be admissible as a business record, subject to other substantive or procedural objections, in any court in this state upon the affidavit of the person who would otherwise provide the prerequisites of sections 490.”
White v. Am. Repub. Ins. Co., 799 S.W.2d 183 (Mo. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2ד[12] Statute commonly known as the "Uniform Business Records as Evidence Law," §§ 490.660 to 490.690, RSMo 1986. [13] On cross-examination of plaintiff, the following testimony was elicited: Q.”
State v. Graham, 641 S.W.2d 102 (Mo. 1982). “Defendant next contends the trial court erred in admitting medical records of the victim which were not properly qualified under §§ 490.660 — 490.690, RSMo 1978, Missouri’s Uniform Business Records as Evidence law.”
Melton v. St. Louis Pub. Serv. Co., 251 S.W.2d 663 (Mo. 1952). · cites it 2ד) Plaintiff-appellant objected on the ground that The Uniform Business Records as Evidence Law, Sections 490.660 to 490.690, RSMo 1949, V.”
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.