Legal Opinion · Dissent

Shipley v. Cates

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided August 8, 2006No. SC 87063Published

1Dissent

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR., Judge.

I respectfully dissent. The contracts entered into between the Director of the Missouri Department of Health and the Planned Parenthood defendants were illegal and void. Therefore, the state is entitled to the return of the funds expended. It is no defense that the contracts were fully performed, because suit was filed before any funds were expended and any services were performed so that defendants were put on notice that the contracts were suspect from the start.

The family planning appropriations for the four years in question were conditioned on the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Jones v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Bride v. City of SlaterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1953
  3. Aetna Ins. Co. v. O'malley.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1939
  4. Sparks v. Jasper CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
  5. County of St. Francois v. BrookshireSupreme Court of Missouri · 1957

4 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