Best Brokers, Inc. and Welch Brokerage, Inc., d/b/a Wbbi, Appellant/Cross-Respondent, v. Ron Carey, et al., as Representatives and Members of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Respondents/Cross-Appellants.
Decision date: Unknown
Slip Opinion Notice
This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.
Opinion
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District Case Style: Best Brokers, Inc. and Welch Brokerage, Inc., d/b/a Wbbi, Appellant/Cross-Respondent, v. Ron Carey, et al., as Representatives and Members of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Respondents/Cross- Appellants. Case Number: 73093 and 73092 Handdown Date: 06/30/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, Hon. Robert H. Dierker, Jr. Counsel for Appellant: Robert J. Radice and John M. Horas Counsel for Respondent: Arthur J. Martin Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Crane, P.J., Rhodes Russell and J. Dowd, J.J., concur. Opinion: ORDER Plaintiffs, Best Brokers, Inc. and Welch Brokerage, Inc., d/b/a/ WBBI ("WBBI"), appeal from the order of the trial court granting summary judgment in favor of defendants, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters ("IBT"), in an action for damages for breach of contract. IBT cross-appeals from the trial court's judgment dismissing its counterclaim for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We affirm. An extended opinion would serve no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). Separate Opinion: None
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Related Opinions
AIG Agency, Inc., d/b/a Associated Insurance Group, Appellant, vs. Missouri General Insurance Agency, Inc., Jim Baxendale and Mitch O'Brien, Respondents.(2015)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictNovember 3, 3015#ED102096
Christopher Hanshaw, Appellant, vs. Crown Equipment Corp., et al., Respondents.(2026)
Supreme Court of MissouriFebruary 24, 2026#SC101091
The court affirmed the circuit court's decision to exclude Hanshaw's expert witness testimony and grant summary judgment to Crown Equipment in a product liability case involving an allegedly defectively designed forklift. The expert's opinions were properly excluded because they were not supported by reliable methodology, as the expert performed no tests and failed to demonstrate how cited research and data supported his conclusions.
Mouna Apperson, f/k/a Nicholas Apperson, Appellant, vs. Natasha Kaminsky, et al., Respondents.(2026)
Supreme Court of MissouriJanuary 23, 2026#SC101020
The court affirmed the directed verdict as to four counts against Norman based on agency but vacated and remanded the defamation counts against Kaminsky and one count against Norman, finding that the circuit court erred in requiring independent evidence of reputational damage beyond the plaintiff's own testimony when the evidence of harm was substantial and directly resulted from the defendants' statements.
K.A.C. by and through, ASHLEY ACOSTA, NEXT FRIEND, and MICHAEL CRITES, JR., Appellants v. MISSOURI STATE HIGHWAY PATROL, ET AL., Respondents(2026)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictJanuary 12, 2026#SD38943
Appellants sought damages for a wrongful death resulting from a motor vehicle collision involving a pursued driver, alleging the Missouri State Highway Patrol's pursuit was negligent and proximately caused the collision. The court affirmed summary judgment for MSHP, finding that Appellants failed to produce sufficient facts demonstrating that MSHP's actions were the proximate cause of the collision, which is a necessary element of their case.
Mark and Sherry Davis, and David and Denise Kamm; Kevin Laughlin vs. City of Kearney, Missouri(2025)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictDecember 16, 2025#WD87389