Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

239 Mo. 430

Hoverstock v. Rogers

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided February 6, 1912

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1912-02-06

<p>The facts in this case are the same as those in the case of Wrights-man v. Rogers, ante, p. 417, and this case is decided upon tn« authority of that.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1914

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed and remanded (with directions) · Decided 1912-02-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

ROT, C.

¶1— The facts in this case are in all respects the same as in the case of Ora "Wrightsman v. John 0. Rogers, the same defendant (ante, p. 417).

¶2Our opinion in this case is the same as in than

¶3The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to proceed with the cause in accord-' *431anee with the opinion in that case.

Bond, G. (sitting in Division Two when this case was argned), concurs.PER CURIAM.

¶4— The foregoing opinion of Roy, C., is adopted as the opinion of the court.

All the judges concur.
/239/mo/430 · .json · Public domain