Missouri Court of Appeals· 1/26/2010

Diehl v. Fred Weber, Inc.

Citations

309 S.W.3d 309
2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 75
2010 WL 286744

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

finding inadvertent disclosure did not waive the attorney-client privilege and documents should be returned to the party who disclosed them
finding that defendant presented no evidence establishing that anyone reasonably believed he was a terrorist or that his reputation was damaged when the first lawsuit was filed and thus that a disputed issue of material fact existed regarding the abuse of process claim
listing elements of claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress under Missouri law
filing an action to silence an individual, rather than obtain remuneration for defamation
finding summary judgment against the plaintiffs was inappropriate because the record, which included specific statements from an officer of the defendant corporation, implied a defamation action may have been instituted for the collateral purpose of silencing an individual
summary judgment against Diehls in abuse-of-process suit not appropriate when evidence showed Weber made statements saying it pursued prior defamation litigation to quiet Diehls rather than because it believed valid defamation claim existed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Norton, Hoff, Mooney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.