McDonnell v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.

964 S.W.2d 247, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 625, 1998 WL 149429
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 31, 1998
DocketNo. 72322
StatusPublished

This text of 964 S.W.2d 247 (McDonnell v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.) 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
McDonnell v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 964 S.W.2d 247, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 625, 1998 WL 149429 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James F. McDonnell, Jr. (Appellant) appeals from the judgment entered upon a jury verdict in favor of Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (Respondent). Appellant’s only point on appeal claims the trial court erred in allowing, over Appellant’s objection, Respondent’s counsel to discuss facts and defenses during closing argument that were not supported by the evidence.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file and the record on appeal. This allegation of error was not preserved for review because the trial judge did not ex[248]*248pressly rule on the objection. Barnes v. Tools & Machinery Builders, Inc., 715 S.W.2d 518, 523 (Mo. banc 1986). No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential or jurisprudential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with 84.16(b).

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

Related

Barnes v. Tools & MacHinery Builders, Inc.
715 S.W.2d 518 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
964 S.W.2d 247, 1998 Mo. App. LEXIS 625, 1998 WL 149429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdonnell-v-owens-corning-fiberglas-corp-moctapp-1998.