Legal Opinion

Fortenberry v. Bali

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided March 13, 1984No. 46928PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

REINHARD, Judge.

Plaintiffs Avery and Janice Fortenberry instituted suit pursuant to § 228.340, RSMo. 1978, to establish a private road by reason of strict necessity across land of the defendants, Philip and Celestena Bali. Defendants appeal after the circuit court found plaintiffs had no means of access to their property and therefore were entitled to a road of necessity over defendants’ land.

The plaintiffs alleged in their petition that they are owners of land in St. Louis County, that no public road passes through or alongside their land, and that a private road across defendants’ property…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Vossen v. DautelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
  2. Carpenter-Union Hills Cemetery Ass'n v. Camp Zoe, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1977
  3. McDougall v. CastelliMissouri Court of Appeals · 1973
  4. Beldner v. General Electric CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1970
  5. Benson v. FeketeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1968

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Hill v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1985
  2. Bickel v. HansenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
  3. Farrow v. BrownMissouri Court of Appeals · 1994
  4. Gill Grain Co. v. PoosMissouri Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. Smith v. Chamblin Properties, LLCMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006

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