Harris v. State Bank & Trust Co. of Wellston, 56251
| Decision Date | 11 September 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 56251,No. 2,56251,2 |
| Citation | 484 S.W.2d 177 |
| Parties | Charles HARRIS, d/b/a Harris Super Market, Appellant, v. STATE BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF WELLSTON et al., Respondents |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Donald V. Nangle, St. Louis, for appellant.
John C. Danforth, Atty. Gen., John C. Craft, D. Brook Bartlett, Asst. Attys. Gen., Jefferson City, for State Treasurer of Missouri, William E. Robinson.
Cook & Vetter, Jefferson City, for Central Missouri Trust Co.
Plaintiff's petition for declaratory judgment was dismissed by the trial court for failure to state a cause of action upon the motion of each of the defendants. (Sections 527.010--527.140, RSMo 1969, V.A.M.S.; and Supreme Court Rule 87.) Plaintiff has appealed.
The petition reflects that plaintiff was engaged in the retail grocery business; that he had cashed certain 'state' checks issued by the Treasurer of Missouri payable from funds in the Central Missouri Trust Company and had deposited the same in his account with the State Bank and Trust Company of Wellston; that certain of such deposits had been nullified by debit charges against his account after the payees of such checks had filed affidavits that the endorsements thereon had been forged. After a detailed recitation of such facts, it was declared that '. . . there are important, difficult and doubtful questions respecting plaintiff's business checking account, . . .' and thereafter twelve questions are set out. One, in part, is: ? The prayer of the petition requests answers to such questions so that 'he may proceed in obtaining satisfactory remedy.'
The court's conclusions in Nations v. Ramsey, Mo.App., 387 S.W.2d 276, are expressed in words appropriate here, to-wit (l.c. 279): ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Missouri Soybean v. Missouri Clean Water
...action. A declaratory judgment is not a general panacea for all real and imaginary legal ills. Harris v. State Bank & Trust Company of Wellston, 484 S.W.2d 177, 178 (Mo.1972); City of Joplin v. Jasper County, 349 Mo. 441, 161 S.W.2d 411, 413 (1942). It is not available to adjudicate hypothe......
-
Hammons v. Ehney
...at 380 (implied contract). Generally, equity will not intercede if there is an adequate remedy at law. Harris v. State Bank and Trust Co. of Wellston, 484 S.W.2d 177, 179 (Mo.1972); Umphres v. J.R. Mayer Enterprises, Inc., 889 S.W.2d 86, 90 (Mo.App.1994). An exception to this theory, howeve......
-
Thompson v. Medical Licensing Bd.
...v. Wood (1974), 167 Conn. 334, 355 A.2d 307; Hampson v. State ex rel. Buckson (1967) (Del.), 233 A.2d 155; Harris v. State Bank & Trust Co. of Wellston (1972), (Mo.) 484 S.W.2d 177; Slosburg v. City of Omaha, supra; Equitable Leasing, Inc. v. Maguire (1971), 36 A.D.2d 1020, 321 N.Y.S.2d 410......
-
Alpert v. State, SC 96024
...it all—when there are "exceptional circumstances" that "plainly appear[ ]" from the facts of the case. Harris v. State Bank & Tr. Co. of Wellston , 484 S.W.2d 177, 178-79 (Mo. 1972). Alpert fails to explain why his controversy is so exceptional that this Court should depart from its general......