Sinclair v. Mackey

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sinclair v. Mackey

809 S.W.2d 482, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 788, 1991 WL 94175

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided June 4, 1991·No. No. 59478·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant (plaintiff) appeals from a November 26, 1990 judgment dismissing his personal injury petition with prejudice as a sanction under Rule 61.01(f). At the sanctions hearing plaintiff failed to present evidence showing a satisfactory explanation of his attorney’s failure to appear at two scheduled depositions. The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant (plaintiff) appeals from a November 26, 1990 judgment dismissing his personal injury petition with prejudice as a sanction under Rule 61.01(f). At the sanctions hearing plaintiff failed to present evidence showing a satisfactory explanation of his attorney’s failure to appear at two scheduled depositions. The judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Sinclair v. Mackey, 809 S.W.2d 482, 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 788, 1991 WL 94175 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

809 S.W.2d 482 (Sinclair v. Mackey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.