Legal Opinion

Murphy v. Grisham

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 24, 1981No. 12190PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PREWITT, Presiding Judge.

Plaintiffs sought a deficiency judgment following the foreclosure of a deed of trust on real estate which secured the payment of a promissory note they held. Defendants counterclaimed, seeking to set aside the foreclosure sale. The trial judge entered judgment in plaintiffs’ favor on their petition and denied defendants’ counterclaim.

Defendants here contend that the trial court erred: 1) in awarding plaintiffs an amount equal to 25% of the unpaid balance of the note as attorney’s fees “BECAUSE SUCH AN ATTORNEY FEE IS UNREASONABLE AND UNCONSCIONABLE IN THAT THE FEE IS…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. PowersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Scott v. Home Mutual Telephone Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1974
  3. Vadnais v. VadnaisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Higgins v. McElweeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Boatmen's Bank of Butler v. BerwaldMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
  3. S.M.B. ex rel. W.K.B. v. A.T.W.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. State ex rel. State Highway Commission v. KoziatekMissouri Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Roberts v. RiderMissouri Court of Appeals · 1996

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

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

Powered by the Exa API