Legal Opinion
Orr v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n
Missouri Court of Appeals
Decided December 1, 1947PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*244On Motion for Rehearing
DEW, J.-
Appellant submits two points in his motion for rehearing. First, it is contended that we erroneously stated the- law in holding that there could be no estoppel to deny the service of the statutory written notice of his lien based solely upon the acts of the debtor. It is claimed that such ruling is in conflict with Abbott v. United Rys. Co., 138 Mo. App. 530, 119 S. W. 964. In the present case not only was no written notice pleaded in plaintiff’s petition, but it was specifically admitted therein that no such notice was given or attempted. This vital and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rhodus v. GeatleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
- Carter v. OsterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Abbott v. United Railways Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
3Cited by8 opinions
- Sharrow v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
- Pillow v. General American Life Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1978
- Skelly v. RichmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Corrigan v. Armstrong, Teasdale, Schlafly, Davis & DicusMissouri Court of Appeals · 1992
- Friedman v. Edward L. Bakewell, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.