Fitzpatrick v. Federer
Supreme Court of Missouri
1Opinion of the Court
COIL, Commissioner.
Respondents’ separate motions to dismiss plaintiffs’ petition were sustained on the ground that it failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted. Plaintiffs appealed from the ensuing judgment. Thus, the sole question here is whether the petition states facts which may invoke the application of principles of substantive law which would entitle plaintiffs to the relief sought. Gerber v. Schutte Investment Co., 354 Mo. 1246, 194 S.W.2d 25, 28 [4-7], The motions to dismiss admit the truth of facts well pleaded in the petition and the reasonable inferences deducible…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Casper v. LeeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1952
- Gerber v. Schutte Investment Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1946
- Hendricks v. CallowaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Jacobs v. JacobsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1954
- Wooton v. HinkleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1855
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Polish National Alliance of Brooklyn, U.S.A. v. White Eagle Hall Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- James B. Nutter & Co. v. Taylor (In Re Taylor)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Missouri · 1982
- J. Louis Crum Corp. v. Alfred Lindgren, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1978
- Kennon v. CampSupreme Court of Missouri · 1962
- Morris Plan Co. v. Fountain (In Re Fountain)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Missouri · 1983
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.