Legal Opinion

Orr v. Mut. Ben. H. A. Assn.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 1, 1947Published

1Opinion of the Court

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

Appellant submits two points in his motion for rehearing. First, it is contended that we erroneously stated the law in holding that there could be no estoppel to deny the service of the statutory written notice of his lien based solely upon the acts of the debtor. It is claimed that such ruling is in conflict with Abbott v. United Rys. Co., 138 Mo. App. 530, 119 S.W. 964. In the present case not only was no written notice pleaded in plaintiff's petition, but it was specifically admitted therein that no such notice was given or attempted. This vital and essential…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rhodus v. GeatleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
  2. Carter v. OsterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
  3. Abbott v. United Railways Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909

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

Powered by the Exa API