Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Propes v. Griffith

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided May 2, 2000No. WD 57232PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HAROLD L. LOWENSTEIN, Judge.

FACTS

This appeal arises from a judgment in a court-tried case in favor of respondents David and Cindy Propes, assessing actual damages against appellants Mark and Sarah Griffith, and punitive damages against appellant Sarah Griffith individually. The Propes filed a petition for damages against the Griffiths for killing two dogs belonging to the Propes. At the heart of this suit is § 273.030, RSMo 1994, relied upon as a defense to the Griffith’s actions which is now set out.

If any person shall discover any dog or dogs in the act of killing, wounding or chasing sheep…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Murphy v. CarronSupreme Court of Missouri · 1976
  2. Rodriguez v. Suzuki Motor Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1996
  3. Call v. HeardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1996
  4. McKeehan v. WittelsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1974
  5. Reed v. GoldneckMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bush Construction MacHinery, Inc. v. Kansas City Factory Outlets, L.L.C.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2002
  2. Glenstone Block Co. v. PebworthMissouri Court of Appeals · 2008
  3. Llaven v. People for the Ethical Treatment of AnimalsNorfolk County Circuit Court · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API