Haight v. Drivetime Car Sales Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Haight v. Drivetime Car Sales Co.

555 S.W.3d 478

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 29, 2018

DocketWD 81164

StatusPublished

This text of 555 S.W.3d 478 (Haight v. Drivetime Car Sales Co.) 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

Haight v. Drivetime Car Sales Co., 555 S.W.3d 478 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

*479DriveTime Car Sales Company, LLC appeals from the ruling of the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, denying its motion to compel David and Gifty Haight to arbitrate their claims against DriveTime for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and violation of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum of law has been provided to the parties. The Circuit Court's ruling is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Per Curiam:

*479DriveTime Car Sales Company, LLC appeals from the ruling of the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, denying its motion to compel David and Gifty Haight to arbitrate their claims against DriveTime for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and violation of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum of law has been provided to the parties. The Circuit Court's ruling is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

555 S.W.3d 478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haight-v-drivetime-car-sales-co-moctapp-2018.