Curley v. Animal Clinic of Kendallwood

506 S.W.3d 414, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 14, 2017 WL 83531
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 10, 2017
DocketWD 78979
StatusPublished

This text of 506 S.W.3d 414 (Curley v. Animal Clinic of Kendallwood) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Curley v. Animal Clinic of Kendallwood, 506 S.W.3d 414, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 14, 2017 WL 83531 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Animal Clinic of Kendallwood, LLC and Dr. Randall Lary, its owner and operator, (collectively Defendants) appeal from the trial court’s judgment on the jury verdicts in favor of Jill Curley for both actual and punitive damages in Curley’s suit for sexual harassment under the Missouri Human Rights Act. Defendants’ points on appeal challenge the trial court’s exclusion of evidence. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been presented to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
506 S.W.3d 414, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 14, 2017 WL 83531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curley-v-animal-clinic-of-kendallwood-moctapp-2017.