Legal Opinion

Koerper & Co. v. Unitel International, Inc.

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided November 17, 1987No. 69311PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DONNELLY, Judge.

This ease was transferred here by the Western District of the Court of Appeals for resolution of a conflict between Hawkins v. Hawkins, 533 S.W.2d 634 (Mo.App.1976) and Link v. Ise, 716 S.W.2d 805 (Mo.App.1986). Mo. Const, art. V, § 10.

The question is: When may an amended petition relate back to the filing of an original petition so as to save a plaintiff’s cause of action from the bar of a statute of limitations?

In Arpe v. Mesker Brothers Iron Company, 323 Mo. 640, 648, 19 S.W.2d 668, 670 (1929) this Court said: “The general rule is that an amendment will not have such effect…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McDaniel v. LovelaceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
  2. Laux v. Motor Carriers Council of St. Louis, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1973
  3. Arpe v. Mesker Brothers Iron Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1929
  4. Hawkins v. HawkinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. Miller v. WernerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1968

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Mary Plubell, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Merck & Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2006
  2. Drury Displays, Inc. v. Board of Adjustment of City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1988
  3. Centerre Bank of Kansas City National Ass'n v. AngleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1998
  4. Halupa v. HalupaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1997
  5. Wilson v. P.B. Patel, M.D., P.C.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2017

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

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

Powered by the Exa API