Legal Opinion

Bragg v. Ohio Chemical & Manufacturing Co.

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided December 16, 1941PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.

The original'opinion in this case was written by Bohling, C. We granted a rehearing because we feared we misunderstood the workings- of the machine involved. The case was reargued and assigned to the writer who prepared an opinion which was adopted. Both of these- opinions reversed the judgment for respondent. Now on second rehearing, she urges that we still fail to comprehend the workings'of-the machine, and that seems'to'be true. Appellants have filed a motion to strike out, respondent’s second motion for rehearing under Rule 21 of this court, which provides that no second motion for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wendorff v. Missouri State Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1927
  2. Brunswick v. Standard Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1919
  3. State Ex Rel. Alton Railroad Co. v. ShainSupreme Court of Missouri · 1940
  4. McCormick Ex Rel. McCormick v. Lowe & Campbell Athletic Goods Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1940

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Gediman v. Anheuser Busch, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
  2. Ruby v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1948
  3. Keeney-Toelle Real Estate Co. v. HillinghorstMissouri Court of Appeals · 1959
  4. Gediman v. Anheuser BuschCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
  5. Alexander v. Saunders Mills, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API