Court Opinion

ID: 9770458
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 16:05:39.959557+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:17.476196
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing or Transfer to Court en -Banc
PER CURIAM.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing or to transfer to Banc, referring to a' bailment under § 560.260, again stresses a statement arguendo in State v. Anderson, Mo., 232 S. *383W.2d 909, 912, reading: “It does not mean a loan of personal property for a borrower’s sole benefit.” Appellant recognizes that this statement ‘‘was not a square and direct holding.” There is no conflict between the holdings in the Anderson case and the instant case. Appellant argues that if the quoted statement be literally true then when a consideration passes to the bailor under an arm’s length agreement the bailee also acts for his own benefit and the necessary fiduciary relationship does not exist. Reading the Anderson case as a whole and said statement in the light of its setting it is to the effect that bailments under § 560.260 are not necessarily limited to bailments for a borrower’s sole benefit.
The foregoing disposes of the matters in appellant’s motion in so far as they need be reviewed under the instant record.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing or to transfer to .Banc is overruled.