Legal Opinion
Randall v. Harmon
Missouri Court of Appeals
Decided November 30, 1988No. 15523PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PREWITT, Judge.
Appellant appeals from the trial court’s order finding that a compromise settlement had been agreed to by the parties and in ordering them to carry out that settlement.
Case law has established that an agreement to settle a pending law suit may be enforced by a proper motion. Such a motion adds to the pending action a collateral action seeking specific performance of the agreement. Landmark Bank v. First National Bank in Madison, 738 S.W.2d 922, 923 (Mo.App.1987). The party requesting specific performance of a settlement agreement has the burden of proving, by clear, convincing…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Johnston v. First National Bank & Trust Co. of JoplinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981
- DeWitt v. LutesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1979
- Landmark Bank v. First National Bank in MadisonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1987
- Sharpton v. LoftonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1986
- Marc's Restaurant, Inc. v. CBS, INC.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1987
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- L.B. v. State Committee of PsychologistsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1995
- Betty Jane Stewart, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. M.D.F., Inc., Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
- Byrd v. LiesmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992
- Singh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1993
- Tinucci v. R v. Evans Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1998
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.