Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Citation
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Parent Document
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 2006-10-03
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1878345/smith-v-thomas/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (35)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
- Smith v. Thomas, 210 S.W.3d 241 (2006)
Full Text
424 charsIn his second point, Appellant claims that the trial court’s judgment in favor of Respondents was not supported by substantial evidence and was against the weight of the evidence. Appellant contends that the evidence presented at trial established that Respondents had not paid their rent and that they had failed to leave the property in a suitable condition and that he was, therefore, entitled to damages on his petition.