Legal Opinion

Riley v. L.J. Schuster Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 17, 1992No. 60264PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GARY M. GAERTNER, Presiding Judge.

Plaintiffs/appellants, James Riley and Steven Barnard (hereinafter “appellants”), appeal the denial of their motion for a new trial or JNOV on a contract action claiming commissions due. Respondent/cross appellant, L.J. Schuster Company (hereinafter “respondent”), appeals from the court’s order granting appellants’ motion for JNOV on respondent’s claims of conversion and also appeals the court’s order granting appellants’ motion for a new trial on respondent’s claim of interference with prospective advantage. We affirm in part and reverse and remand in part,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Means v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1977
  2. Artstein Ex Rel. Artstein v. Pallo Ex Rel. PalloSupreme Court of Missouri · 1965
  3. Lappe and Associates, Inc. v. PalmenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. Schaefer v. SpenceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. Sansone v. St. Louis CountyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Monarch Fire Protection District of St. Louis County v. Freedom Consulting & Auditing Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
  2. Maberry v. SaidDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1995
  3. Monarch Fire Protection v. Freedom ConsultingDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2009
  4. Hawkins v. CockroftMissouri Court of Appeals · 1993
  5. Monarch Fire Protection Dist. v. Freedom Consulting & AuditingCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011

1 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