Legal Opinion

Hughes v. Estes

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided August 7, 1990No. 16220PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MAUS, Judge.

By their petition, plaintiffs John B. Hughes and Opal H. Hughes sought recovery against defendants, Coleman Estes and Iris D. Estes because the defendants, by a fraudulent misrepresentation, induced the plaintiffs to purchase an apartment building. A jury awarded the plaintiffs a judgment for actual damages of $9,500 against both defendants and a judgment for punitive damages of $10,000 against defendant Iris D. Estes. The defendants state four points on appeal.

*208This opinion should not be construed as deciding any other issues inherent in the case. Only a broad outline of the facts…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Tietjens v. General Motors CorporationSupreme Court of Missouri · 1967
  2. Salmon Ex Rel. Salmon v. BrookshireMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957
  3. Auffenberg v. HafleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1970
  4. First National Bank of Independence v. Mid-Century Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1977
  5. State Ex Rel. Union Pac. Railroad Co. v. BlandSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Buck v. LeggettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1991
  2. Collins v. TrammellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. Beardsley v. BeardsleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1991
  4. Wallace v. SniderMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API