1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.W.2d
  4. 408 S.W.2d
  5. 408 S.W.2d 168 (1966)
 

BARCLAY INVESTMENT CORPORATION v. LAMKIN

No. 32259.

408 S.W.2d 168 (1966)

BARCLAY INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a Corporation, and Maplewood Finance Company, a Corporation, d/b/a The Barclay House, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Mr. Robert B. LAMKIN and Mrs. Robert B. Lamkin, Defendants-Respondents.

St. Louis Court of Appeals, Missouri.

October 18, 1966.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Green & Raymond, by James J. Raymond, St. Louis, for appellants.

Armstrong, Teasdale, Kramer & Vaughan, by Charles E. Dapron and Fred Leicht, Jr., St. Louis, for respondents.

CLEMENS, Commissioner.

Lamkin had already sued Barclay, his corporate landlord, when Barclay filed this separate suit against Lamkin and his wife. The trial court dismissed Barclay's petition because Barclay had violated the compulsory counterclaim rule. Barclay has appealed. The down-to-brass-tacks issue is this: Can a defendant get away from the compulsory counterclaim rule by filing a separate suit against the plaintiff...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases