Legal Opinion
Roach Law Firm v. Beilenson
Missouri Court of Appeals
Decided March 6, 2007No. ED 88286PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NANNETTE A. BAKER, Judge.
Introduction
Norton Beilenson (“Beilenson”) and Edwards, Schramm, Watkins, Spoeneman, Waltrip & Beilenson, L.L.P. (collectively, “the Defendants”) appeal from a judgment of the trial court sustaining the Roach Law Firm’s motion for summary judgment on its petition for a declaratory judgment. We reverse and remand with instructions to dismiss the action because Missouri courts have no jurisdiction to consider a declaratory judgment action without a jus-ticiable controversy. 1
Factual and Procedural Background
On April 26, 2004, Carol and Brian Car-rico engaged Beilenson…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Grewell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2003
- Jew v. Home Depot USA, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2004
- Government e-Management Solutions, Inc. v. American Arbitration AssnMissouri Court of Appeals · 2004
- Shelton v. SheltonMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006
- George v. BrewerMissouri Court of Appeals · 2001
3Cited by9 opinions
- Borges v. Missouri Public Entity Risk Management FundMissouri Court of Appeals · 2012
- Mid-Century Insurance Co. v. WilburnMissouri Court of Appeals · 2013
- Jean-Robert Nast by and through his guardian Jan Freeman, Plaintiff/Respondent v. Gateway Ambulance Service, LLC, Defendants/Respondents. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, Proposed Intervenor/Appellant.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2016
- Lyman v. Missouri Employers Mutual Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2013
- Trophy Room v. City of St. LouisMissouri Court of Appeals · 2017
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.