Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Citation
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Parent Document
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1986-04-08
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5241179/leve-v-delph/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (16)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
- Leve v. Delph, 710 S.W.2d 389 (1986)
Full Text
577 charsOn appeal, defendants contend that the trial court erred in denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment because plaintiffs failed to properly give plaintiffs notice of demand prior to the filing of the unlawful detainer action. Defendants argue that § 534.050 RSMo 1978, requires plaintiffs to serve notice by delivering a *391copy of a demand for possession to the person in possession, or by leaving such copy with some person above the age of fifteen years, residing on or being in charge of the premises prior to the filing of the unlawful detainer action. We disagree.