Konkel v. T-BIRD, INC.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Konkel v. T-BIRD, INC.

182 S.W.3d 637, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1810, 2005 WL 3291222

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 6, 2005

DocketED 85873

StatusPublished

This text of 182 S.W.3d 637 (Konkel v. T-BIRD, INC.) 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

Konkel v. T-BIRD, INC., 182 S.W.3d 637, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1810, 2005 WL 3291222 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Pamela Konkel (“Konkel”) appeals from a judgment of the trial court that granted T-Bird Inc. (“T-Bird”) and S.W.L. Enterprises, L.L.C. (“SWL”) their Motion to Dismiss Konkel’s petition for failure to state a claim. Konkel claims that the trial court erred in dismissing her petition on the grounds that she lacked standing to sue T-Bird and SWL in either her capacity as Robert Konkel’s (“Deceased”) ex-wife or as administratrix of his estate. In her second point relied on, Konkel argues that the trial court erred in finding that her divorce decree failed to comply with the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution. Specifically, Konkel claims that the only issue before the trial court was whether her petition stated a cause of action, not whether she had adequately proved each of the elements of her cause of action. We find no error and affirm.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Pamela Konkel (“Konkel”) appeals from a judgment of the trial court that granted T-Bird Inc. (“T-Bird”) and S.W.L. Enterprises, L.L.C. (“SWL”) their Motion to Dismiss Konkel’s petition for failure to state a claim. Konkel claims that the trial court erred in dismissing her petition on the grounds that she lacked standing to sue T-Bird and SWL in either her capacity as Robert Konkel’s (“Deceased”) ex-wife or as administratrix of his estate. In her second point relied on, Konkel argues that the trial court erred in finding that her divorce decree failed to comply with the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution. Specifically, Konkel claims that the only issue before the trial court was whether her petition stated a cause of action, not whether she had adequately proved each of the elements of her cause of action. We find no error and affirm.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 S.W.3d 637, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1810, 2005 WL 3291222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/konkel-v-t-bird-inc-moctapp-2005.