Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Howe v. ALD Services, Inc., 941 S.W.2d 645 (1997)

Citation
Howe v. ALD Services, Inc., 941 S.W.2d 645 (1997)
Parent Document
Howe v. ALD Services, Inc., 941 S.W.2d 645 (1997)
Jurisdiction
Missouri (state)
Effective Date
1997-02-11

Other Sections in This Document (94)

Full Text

569 chars
Landlord contends that the trial court erred in: 1) denying his motion for directed verdict and j.n.o.v.; 2) denying his motion for a mistrial and motion for a new trial because tenant improperly injected landlord’s relationship with his attorney into the trial; 3) refusing to admit certified weather records; 4) refusing to allow his attorney to state in closing argument the law of accord and satisfaction; 5) admitting Exhibit M because it was prejudicial hearsay; and 6) submitting tenant’s Instruction Number 10 to the jury. We affirm in part and reverse in part.