Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Citation
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Parent Document
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1979-03-21
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1567388/bryan-v-vaughn/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (35)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
- Bryan v. Vaughn, 579 S.W.2d 177 (1979)
Full Text
885 charsThe final point for our consideration is defendants’ second point relied on. It suggests that the basis for the trial court’s refusal to award punitive damages for eviction under Count II of the counterclaim was an erroneous finding that defendants had failed to pay the total rent due on September 1, 1973. Defendants state: “If the trial court was in error in holding that defendants owed more rent than was tendered, then the court erred in failing to render a judgment on Count II of defendants’ Counterclaim in favor of defendants and against plaintiffs.” We have explained hereinabove that the trial court was in fact not in error in holding that more rent was owed than was tendered by defendants. The eviction by plaintiffs, while wrongful, was provoked by defendants’ failure to tender all the rent due, and so was not such as would justify the imposition of punitive damages.