Dominick v. Kates

Missouri Court of Appeals

Dominick v. Kates

506 S.W.3d 356, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1010, 2016 WL 5888582

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 11, 2016

DocketWD 79439

StatusPublished

This text of 506 S.W.3d 356 (Dominick v. Kates) 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

Dominick v. Kates, 506 S.W.3d 356, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1010, 2016 WL 5888582 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Dixie Elates appeals the judgment of the trial court in favor of Mary Dominick, trustee of the Greene Family Trust dated November 14, 2003, ordering Ms. Kates’s ejectment from property on which she resided as a trust beneficiary. She argues that Ms. Dominick’s claim was barred by res judicata and that the trial court erred in finding that she violated a forfeiture clause of the trust. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Dixie Elates appeals the judgment of the trial court in favor of Mary Dominick, trustee of the Greene Family Trust dated November 14, 2003, ordering Ms. Kates’s ejectment from property on which she resided as a trust beneficiary. She argues that Ms. Dominick’s claim was barred by res judicata and that the trial court erred in finding that she violated a forfeiture clause of the trust. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties. The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

506 S.W.3d 356, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1010, 2016 WL 5888582, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dominick-v-kates-moctapp-2016.