Heintz v. Hudkins
Missouri Court of Appeals
1DissentPrewitt, Presiding Judge
I respectfully dissent. There is, as the principal opinion states, considerable authority for holding that filing a petition for partition does not destroy a joint tenancy. As there appears to be no Missouri authori*147ty on this question, this court is free to hold, and should hold otherwise.
Plaintiffs decedent had the right to destroy the joint tenancy by conveyance or partition. Remax of Blue Springs v. Vajda & Co., Inc., 708 S.W.2d 804, 806 (Mo.App.1986); Johnson v. Woodard, 356 S.W.2d 526, 528 (Mo.App.1962). He elected to proceed by partition. Had he made a conveyance, apparently this appeal…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hazel Cobb v. Pete GilmerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1966
- Remax of Blue Springs v. Vajda & Co., Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1986
- Johnson v. WoodardMissouri Court of Appeals · 1962