Legal Opinion
Monsanto Co. v. Logisticon, Inc.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Decided January 10, 1989No. 54612PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CRANDALL, Presiding Judge.
Plaintiff, Monsanto Company (Monsanto), appeals from the grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant, Logisticon, Inc. (Logisticon). We affirm.
In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the trial court and the appellate court must scrutinize the record in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion for summary judgment was filed and against whom judgment was rendered, and must accord to that party the benefit of every doubt. Hill v. Air Shields, Inc., 721 S.W.2d 112, 115 (Mo.App.1986). If a genuine issue of fact exists, summary judgment cannot…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Keener v. Dayton Electric Manufacturing CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
- Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Whitehead & Kales Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1978
- Lippard v. Houdaille Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1986
- Frazer v. A. F. Munsterman, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1988
- Hill v. Air Shields, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Powers v. Lycoming EnginesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
- Schweizer v. City of MaplewoodMissouri Court of Appeals · 1990
- Birchwood of Los Angeles, Inc., a California Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Indopco, Inc., Dba National Starch and Chemical Company, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995