Yates v. Yates

3 Citing cases

  1. Blackburn v. CSX Transp.

    No. M2006-01352-COA-R10-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May. 30, 2008)   Cited 18 times
    Recognizing that "an order granting a new trial is not a final order" and that it is "interlocutory"

    Several state courts have discussed the issue whether state or federal law provides the applicable standard and concluded that state law governs because a motion for a new trial is procedural. In Zibung v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 776 S.W.2d 46-47 (Mo. 1989), the Missouri Supreme Court decided that while federal law governed substantive issues in a FELA case, when tried in state court, state law governed a request for new trial since such requests are procedural. Accord Braddy v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 116 S.W.3d 645 (Mo.Ct.App. 2003). This same conclusion was reached in cases construing the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. ยง 688, by the Oregon Supreme Court in Hust v. Moore McCormack Lines, 177 P.2d 429 (Ore. 1947), and the Washington Supreme Court in Smith v. American Mail Line, Ltd., 363 P.2d 133 (Wash.

  2. Estate of Hopkins v. Estate of Hopkins

    862 S.W.2d 470 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 2 times

    It may be that the admission of improper evidence alone is not an issue in a nonjury case, but it can be where the trial court relied on that evidence in arriving at its finding or where there is an absence of competent evidence supporting the judgment. Yates v. Yates, 776 S.W.2d 46 (Mo.App. 1989). Rejection of proper evidence may also be considered on appeal.

  3. Jetz Service Co. v. Chamberlain

    812 S.W.2d 946 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 6 times

    However, the trial court's admission of improper evidence is not ordinarily grounds for reversal in a nonjury case, particularly where the improper evidence does not appear to have played a critical role in the court's decision. Yates v. Yates, 776 S.W.2d 46, 47 (Mo.App. 1989). Assuming, arguendo, that exhibit 16 was erroneously admitted, reversal is not mandated. Missouri law provides that, "even though evidence is admitted improperly, when other competent evidence supports a judgment in a court-tried case such as this, or an equity case, harmless error results."