Muza v. Cash Bargain Lumber Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
MANFORD, Judge.
Suit for damages for malicious prosecution. At the close of plaintiff’s evidence, trial court sustained defendants’ motion for directed verdict. This appeal followed.
By virtue of the trial court’s disposition of this cause, review of the evidence must be undertaken, and the court is required to review such evidence in a light most favorable to appellants’ theory of the case, including any and all inferences to be drawn therefrom. Russell v. Russell, 540 S.W.2d 626 (Mo.App.1976).
Appellant Larry Muza was a subcontractor. Appellant Howard Thiele was a career soldier. The two met…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hoene v. Associated Dry Goods CorporationSupreme Court of Missouri · 1972
- Hughes v. Aetna Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1953
- Palermo v. CottomMissouri Court of Appeals · 1975
- Frederick E. Hernon v. Revere Copper & Brass, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1974
- Bonzo v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1939
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sanders v. Daniel International Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1984
- Sanders v. Daniel International Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1984