Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003

United Capitol Insurance Co. v. Hoodco, Inc.

United Capitol Insurance Co. v. Hoodco, Inc.
Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided November 4, 2003 · Crahan, III, Shaw
125 S.W.3d 859; 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 1764; 2003 WL 22479922 (South Western Reporter, Third Series)

United Capitol Insurance Co. v. Hoodco, Inc.

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Hoodco, Inc. (hereinafter, “Hoodco”) appeals from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment entered in favor of United Capitol Insurance Company (hereinafter, “United Capitol”) claiming United Capitol should not have sought further relief pursuant to Rule 87.10 because it had an adequate remedy at law; United Capitol was estopped from seeking further relief; and consideration of the issue was barred by res judicata. Further, Hoodco argues genuine issues of material fact existed as to its counterclaims of malicious prosecution and abuse of process.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. There is no genuine issue of material fact which would preclude entry of summary judgment. Rule 74.04(c)(3). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. However, we have provided a memorandum opinion, only for the use of the parties, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.