Legal Opinion

Miller v. Varity Corp.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 2, 1996No. 67862 and 68678Published

1Concurrence 1

OPINION

2Concurrence · CrahanCrahan, Presiding Judge

I respectfully concur in result. I would affirm the judgment on the ground that the issues on appeal were not properly preserved by a timely motion for new trial. On the merits, I agree that Plaintiffs made a submis-sible case but cannot join in the majority’s analysis of the issue.

It is undisputed that Defendant’s motion for new trial was untimely if, in fact, it was filed on January 10, 1995 as indicated by the official clerk’s stamp on both the motion and the envelope it apparently arrived in, as well as the official minute entries filed by the clerk’s office. The trial court,…

3Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Murphy v. CarronSupreme Court of Missouri · 1976
  2. Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Keener v. Dayton Electric Manufacturing CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
  4. Blevins v. Cushman MotorsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1977
  5. Nesselrode v. Executive Beechcraft, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1986

18 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