Legal Opinion

MacHholz-parks v. Suddath

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided September 28, 1994No. 19167PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHRUM, Chief Judge.

Based upon adverse possession principles, the trial court sustained a motion for summary judgment filed by defendant, David Suddath (Suddath), thereby vesting him with title to real estate approximately 15 feet wide off the north and east side of land described in Plaintiff, Karen Machholz-Parks’s deed. Plaintiff appeals. 1

We reverse the trial court’s order sustaining Suddath’s motion for summary judgment because the motion is defective and there is no factual basis for the arguments Suddath advances in support of the order sustaining it.

BACKGROUND FACTS

On May 31, 1985,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1993
  2. Walker v. WalkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1974
  3. Barkley v. Carter County State BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. Ortmeyer v. BruemmerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
  5. Lohrmann v. CarterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1983

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Flowers v. RobertsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1998
  2. Conduff v. StoneMissouri Court of Appeals · 1998
  3. Martens v. WhiteMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006
  4. Shoemaker v. HouchenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1999
  5. Williams v. FrymireMissouri Court of Appeals · 2006

12 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