Legal Opinion

Richardson v. Holland

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided October 29, 1987No. 15038PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MAUS, Judge.

In this action the plaintiff alleges he was intentionally shot by defendant Holland with a F.I.E. Derringer, Model D, .38 caliber handgun. Three counts of his petition seek recovery upon the basis of strict liability against F.I.E. Corporation (F.I.E.) as the manufacturer of that handgun. A fourth count against F.I.E. is based upon the allegation of negligent distribution. Other counts are against Holland and the motel at which he was shot.

Upon an appropriate motion, the trial court dismissed the four counts against the manufacturer. The order of dismissal was designated final.…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Keener v. Dayton Electric Manufacturing CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
  2. Zafft v. Eli Lilly & Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1984
  3. Blevins v. Cushman MotorsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1977
  4. Nesselrode v. Executive Beechcraft, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1986
  5. Kelley v. R.G. Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1985

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Delahanty v. HinckleyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. Linegar v. Armour of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
  3. Spuhl v. Shiley, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. Clay v. Missouri Highway & Transportation CommissionMissouri Court of Appeals · 1997
  5. Addison v. WilliamsLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1989

16 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