Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Insurance Co.

601 S.W.2d 8, 1980 Mo. LEXIS 340
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedJuly 15, 1980
DocketNo. 60442
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 601 S.W.2d 8 (Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Insurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Insurance Co., 601 S.W.2d 8, 1980 Mo. LEXIS 340 (Mo. 1980).

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

On June 27, 1979, this Court held § 287.-240, RSMo Supp.1976, constitutional. Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Insurance Company, 583 S.W.2d 162 (Mo. banc 1979).

On April 22, 1980, in Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Insurance Co., — U.S. —, —, 100 S.Ct. 1540, 1547, 64 L.Ed.2d 107 (1980) the United States Supreme Court reversed and said:

“Thus we conclude that the Supreme Court of Missouri erred in upholding the constitutional validity of § 287.240. We are left with the question whether the defect should be cured by extending the presumption of dependence to widowers or by eliminating it for widows. Because state legislation is at issue, and because a remedial outcome consonant with the state legislature’s overall purpose is preferable, we believe that state judges are better positioned to choose an appropriate method of remedying the constitutional violation. Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the Supreme Court of Missouri and remand the case to that court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.”

In its Second Regular Session, the 80th General Assembly of the State of Missouri enacted into law Conference Committee Substitute for House Bill No. 1396 (effective August 13, 1980), which extends the presumption of dependence to widowers.

In these circumstances, we believe the presumption of dependence should be extended to Paul J. Wengler. Jones v. State Highway Commission, 557 S.W.2d 225, 231 (Mo. banc 1977).

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed and the cause remanded.

SEILER, WELLIVER, MORGAN and HIGGINS, JJ., concur. DONNELLY, J., concurs in result in separate opinion filed, BARDGETT, C. J., and RENDLEN, J., dissent.

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

Related

Kopp v. Fair Political Practices Commission
905 P.2d 1248 (California Supreme Court, 1995)
Portman v. Steveco, Inc.
453 N.E.2d 284 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1983)
In Re Marriage of Holt
635 S.W.2d 335 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1982)
City of St. Louis v. Grimes
630 S.W.2d 82 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1982)
Day v. W a Foote Memorial Hospital
316 N.W.2d 712 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1982)
Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Insurance Co.
616 S.W.2d 859 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
601 S.W.2d 8, 1980 Mo. LEXIS 340, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wengler-v-druggists-mutual-insurance-co-mo-1980.