Cannon v. Monroe
This text of 271 S.W.3d 599 (Cannon v. Monroe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
William 0. Cannon and Thomas E. Monroe each owned one-half interest in three related companies. Differences arose, and Cannon brought this action under section 351.467 1 to dissolve the companies and distribute the assets. Monroe argued that section 351.467 impaired an agreement he had with Cannon and was, therefore, invalid. The trial court applied section 351.467, and Monroe appeals to this Court.
*600 Monroe asserts jurisdiction in this Court because the validity of a statute is involved as it relates to his agreement with Cannon. That agreement addressed two different situations: (1) if a shareholder sought to transfer or encumber his shares of stock in the corporation or (2) if a shareholder desired to sell, encumber or otherwise dispose of the stock of the corporation without consent of the other shareholders. In this case, however, Cannon did not seek to exercise either of these options. Rather, as noted, Cannon brought this action under section 351.467 to dissolve the companies and distribute the assets.
As the agreement is not applicable to this action, the validity of section 351.467 is not implicated. The case is ordered transferred to the court of appeals. Mo. Const art. V, sec. 11.
. All statutory references are to RSMo 2000.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
271 S.W.3d 599, 2008 Mo. LEXIS 310, 2008 WL 5233469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannon-v-monroe-mo-2008.