Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Lake Tishomingo Property Owners Ass'n v. Cronin

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided November 20, 1984No. 65516Published

1ConcurrenceBlackmar, Judge

I agree that the decision of the trial court should be sustained on the basis of general equitable principles.

I write because the principal opinion unnecessarily and unwisely pronounces the consent decrees “void.” This broad language might dissuade a court from making an equitable adjustment in a future sitúa-' tion which we cannot precisely foresee, in the manner of Weatherby Lake Improvement Company v. Sherman, 611 S.W.2d 326 (Mo.App.1980), which is cited with apparent approval.

The authorities cited in the principal opinion are not at all appropriate. In Lake Wauwanoka, Inc. v. Spain, 622…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rippe v. SutterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
  2. Lake Wauwanoka, Inc. v. SpainMissouri Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. Weatherby Lake Improvement Co. v. ShermanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API