Griffith v. Hammer
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
REINHARD, Judge.
Plaintiff brought this suit seeking actual and punitive damages. He alleged that the wrongful, willful, and malicious seizure of his property by the defendant police officers forced him to employ an attorney and incur other costs in order to recover the property. Defendants moved to dismiss claiming the immediate action was barred by the doctrine of res judicata because the exact issue was previously litigated in a suit by plaintiff to recover the property from the Board of Police Commissioners. The defendants requested and were granted permission to present evidence, in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Abeles v. WurdackSupreme Court of Missouri · 1955
- Butler Ex Rel. Butler v. Circulus, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1977
- Agnew v. Union Construction CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
- Gerhardt v. MillerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1975
- Estate of Davis v. DavisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1978
3Cited by7 opinions
- Eugene Alper Construction Co. v. Joe Garavelli's of West Port, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1983
- Irwin v. BertelsmeyerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1987
- S v. S.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1980
- Dallas v. DallasMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
- Schneeberger v. Hoette Concrete Construction Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1984
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.