Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Pettus v. NARAL Pro-Choice Mo.
Citations: 518 S.W.3d 903; 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 510; 2017 WL 2333053Docket: No. ED 104812
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals; May 30, 2017; Missouri; State Appellate Court
Nathalie C. Pettus appeals the motion court's denial of her claims due to lack of standing. She sought (1) an accounting of her 2015 gifts to NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri and NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri Foundation; (2) a claim that the Defendants, including NARAL, NARAL Foundation, and Jane Bogetto, fraudulently induced her donation, violating the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act; and (3) a breach of a condition subsequent related to her charitable donation. The court affirmed the motion court's dismissal of her petition, ruling that Pettus lacked standing for the return of the funds, and also dismissed her claims for an accounting and damages under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. The court noted that no written opinion was necessary as no jurisprudential purpose would be served, but provided a memorandum outlining the reasons for the decision. The judgment was affirmed under Rule 84.16(b).