Legal Opinion · Dissent
Gage & Tucker v. Director of Revenue
Supreme Court of Missouri
Decided April 18, 1989No. Nos. 70556—70564 (Consolidated)Published
1DissentWelliver, Judge
I respectfully dissent. The Missouri Bar Association recently created a self insur-*127anee company whereby many Missouri lawyers can and do self insure themselves for legal malpractice. I do not believe that virtually all of the major law firms of this state, the appellants herein, can 1) totally be wrong in their understanding of the law of due process and equal protection, and 2) totally be wrong in what appears to be their belief that they are utilizing the proper and most efficient and cost effective method of protecting the citizenry of this state against their possible legal malpractice.
The…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Allgeyer v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Western & Southern Life Ins. Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. WardSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Compañia General De Tabacos De Filipinas v. Collector of Internal RevenueSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- St. Louis Cotton Compress Co. v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.