Legal Opinion

Rinderknecht v. Caulfield

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided July 29, 1986No. 50786PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CRANDALL, Presiding Judge.

Defendant, Joseph Caulfield, appeals from the judgment, in a court-tried case, entered in favor of plaintiff, Elmer Rin-derknecht, on plaintiff’s claim for commissions due pursuant to a business agreement and on defendant’s counterclaim for expenses incurred in running the business. We affirm.

The standard of appellate review is guided by the oft-cited Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976). Where there is a conflict in the evidence, the trial court has the prerogative to determine the credibility of the witnesses, accepting or rejecting all, part, or…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Murphy v. CarronSupreme Court of Missouri · 1976
  2. Ware v. WareMissouri Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. In Re Marriage of RyterskiMissouri Court of Appeals · 1983
  4. Fountain v. SchlankerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1983
  5. Steinbruegge v. SteinbrueggeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Thurmond v. Director of RevenueMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988
  2. Moore v. Director of RevenueMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991
  3. Schroeder v. Dy-Tronix, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1987
  4. Calvary Heights Baptist Temple v. MolaskyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1987
  5. Young v. St. Louis UniversityMissouri Court of Appeals · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API