Case Name: Lois BERRY, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Sara E. ALLGOOD, M.D., et al., Defendants-Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Missouri
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1984-06-19
Citations: 672 S.W.2d 74
Docket Number: No. 65719
Parties: Lois BERRY, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Sara E. ALLGOOD, M.D., et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: WELLIVER, HIGGINS, GUNN, BILLINGS, BLACKMAR and DONNELLY, JJ., concur.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 672
Pages: 74–80

Head Matter:
Lois BERRY, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Sara E. ALLGOOD, M.D., et al., Defendants-Respondents.
No. 65719.
Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc.
June 19, 1984.
Richard L. Hughes, St. Louis, for plaintiffs-appellants.
Eugene K. Buckley, St. Louis, for defendants-respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Smith in his opinion for the Court of Appeals, Eastern District, copy of which is appended.
There is no conflict between the conclusions of the majority and the cases of Kennedy v. Holladay, 105 Mo. 24, 16 S.W. 688 (1891); and McGraw v. O'Neil, 123 Mo.App. 691, 101 S.W. 132 (1907), cited by the dissenting judge in certifying the case to us. Both of those cases hold that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in determining that the contact with jurors there shown did not require new trial.
WELLIVER, HIGGINS, GUNN, BILLINGS, BLACKMAR and DONNELLY, JJ., concur.
RENDLEN, C.J., dissents in separate opinion filed.