You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages, Inc. v. Culver

Citations: 59 S.W.3d 33; 2001 Mo. App. LEXIS 1561; 2001 WL 1034613Docket: No. ED 78180

Court: Missouri Court of Appeals; September 11, 2001; Missouri; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Ronald Culver appeals a judgment in favor of Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages (SWB) regarding a breach of contract. Culver argues that the trial court erred by requiring him to choose between his counterclaims for negligent misrepresentation and fraudulent misrepresentation, and by not instructing the jury on the negligent misrepresentation claim. After reviewing the parties' briefs, legal files, and transcripts, the court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting the negligent misrepresentation instruction, referencing Hackman v. Kindrick as precedent. The court opted not to provide a detailed opinion as it would lack precedential value, but issued a memorandum opinion for the parties outlining the rationale for its decision. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Legal Issues Addressed

Abuse of Discretion Standard

Application: The court found no abuse of discretion in the trial court's rejection of the negligent misrepresentation instruction, citing precedent.

Reasoning: The court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting the negligent misrepresentation instruction, referencing Hackman v. Kindrick as precedent.

Breach of Contract

Application: The case involves Ronald Culver's appeal against a judgment in favor of Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages regarding a breach of contract.

Reasoning: Ronald Culver appeals a judgment in favor of Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages (SWB) regarding a breach of contract.

Election between Counterclaims

Application: The trial court required Culver to choose between his counterclaims for negligent misrepresentation and fraudulent misrepresentation.

Reasoning: Culver argues that the trial court erred by requiring him to choose between his counterclaims for negligent misrepresentation and fraudulent misrepresentation.

Jury Instructions on Negligent Misrepresentation

Application: The trial court's decision not to instruct the jury on the negligent misrepresentation claim was reviewed and upheld.

Reasoning: Culver argues that the trial court erred... by not instructing the jury on the negligent misrepresentation claim.

Rule 84.16(b)

Application: The judgment was affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b), and a memorandum opinion was issued without detailed opinion due to its lack of precedential value.

Reasoning: The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).