Legal Opinion

Gant v. Lou Fusz Motor Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 21, 2004No. ED 83347PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

Odessa Gant appeals a judgment entered in favor of Lou Fusz Motor Co. (“Lou Fusz”) on Ms. Gant’s claim that Lou Fusz failed to repair her Pontiac van. Lou Fusz has filed a Motion to Dismiss Ms. Gant’s appeal contending that she failed to comply with Rules 84.04 and 84.06 and Local Rule 365. Because we agree that Ms. Gant has failed to comply with the applicable rules, we dismiss.

Ms. Gant filed a pro se appeal from the trial court’s judgment. Thereafter, Ms. Gant filed a pro se brief and an amended brief. Lou Fusz has not filed a brief in response.

It is well-settled that pro se appellants are…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Davis v. ColemanMissouri Court of Appeals · 2002

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Ward v. United Engineering Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. First State Bank of St. Charles v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2008
  3. Livingston v. Schnuck Markets, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2006
  4. Porter v. Division of Employment SecurityMissouri Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. Prosser v. StateMissouri Court of Appeals · 2008

7 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