Section 20
- Citation
- Section 20
- Parent Document
- WEA Crestwood Plaza, L.L.C. v. Flamers Charburgers, Inc., 24 S.W.3d 1 (2000)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 2000-01-11
Other Sections in This Document (101)
- WEA Crestwood Plaza, L.L.C. v. Flamers Charburgers, Inc., 24 S.W.3d 1 (2000)
- WEA Crestwood Plaza, L.L.C. v. Flamers Charburgers, Inc., 24 S.W.3d 1 (2000)
- WEA Crestwood Plaza, L.L.C. v. Flamers Charburgers, Inc., 24 S.W.3d 1 (2000)
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
- Section 20
Full Text
485 charsTenant filed a motion to dismiss, asserting in substance: (1) that the petition in the Second Suit failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because under Missouri law the judgment in the prior rent and possession action (First Suit) terminated the lease and discharged the parties’ remaining obligations thereunder; and (2) that the Second Suit was barred by the doctrine of res judicata. The motion also asked the trial court to take judicial notice of the First Suit.