Legal Opinion

D.K.L. v. H.P.M.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 15, 1988No. 15596Published

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO TRANSFER TO THE SUPREME COURT

2Per curiam

The child, in a strenuous motion for rehearing or, in the alternative, to transfer this cause to the Supreme Court of Missouri, maintains that inasmuch as defendant employed Roche Biomedical Laboratories as defendant’s “expert” to conduct tests on blood from himself, the mother and the child, “the test results were admissible as an admission against interest of the [defendant] made by [defendant’s] agent, specifically authorized and employed to make the test and report the results.” The child insists that in…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Blevins v. Cushman MotorsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1977
  2. G___ M___ H___ v. J___ L___ H___Missouri Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. George v. Lemay Bank & Trust Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Kimberlin v. C.M. Brown & Associates, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API