Legal Opinion

Buckeye Development Co. v. Feingold

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 22, 1981No. WD 32155PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TURNAGE, Presiding Judge.

Buckeye Development Company filed an action for unlawful detainer and for the recovery of utility costs previously paid to Alan Feingold. The dispute centers about a lease between Feingold and Buckeye on part of a building owned by Buckeye. The court entered judgment in favor of Fein-gold and Buckeye appealed.

Buckeye contends that it was entitled to judgment because Feingold had assigned his lease to a corporation formed by Fein-gold in violation of the provisions of his lease. Buckeye concedes that if the judgment in favor of Feingold on the unlawful detainer action…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Clasen v. Moore Brothers Realty Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1967
  2. Peacock v. FeltmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1927
  3. Feingold v. Buckeye Development Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1978
  4. Galluzzo v. ManninoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
  5. Beckanstin v. Public Savings Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Walker v. Saturn Corp.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Wright v. Rub-A-Dub Car Wash, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Aiello v. AustrianConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984
  4. Harold W. Wright v. Rub-A-Dub Car Wash, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API