White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- Citation
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- Parent Document
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 2002-06-18
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5274787/white-v-buntin/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (20)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
- White v. Buntin, 77 S.W.3d 702 (2002)
Full Text
445 charsOn the record in this case, the trial court did not err in refusing to charge the purchasers with actual or constructive notice of any oral agreement giving tenant the right to remove fill dirt, drain tiles, or driveways. The judgment of the trial court is not against the weight of the evidence, and did not erroneously declare or apply the law. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. JAMES R. DOWD, C.J., and MARY R. RUSSELL, J., concur.