Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1954–2008 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Missouri courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Needles v. Kansas Citygreen2 sentences1976Needles v. Kansas City, 371 S.W.2d 300, 306 [5] (Mo.1963); Hoevelman v. Reorganized School District R2 of Crawford County, 452 S.W.2d 298, 301 [4] (Mo.App.1970). 1967Needles v. Kansas City, Mo., 371 S. W.2d 300, 306-307 [5-9]; Burger v. City of Springfield, Mo., 323 S.W.2d 777, 782-783 [1, 2]. | 2 | 2 |
Veling v. City of Kansas Citygreen1 sentence2008Veling v. City of Kansas City, 901 S.W.2d 119, 121 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
Donovan v. Kansas Citygreen2 sentences1995Donovan v. City of Kansas City, 352 Mo. 430 , 175 S.W.2d 874, 881-82 (1943). 1995Donovan v. City of Kansas City, 352 Mo. 430 , 175 S.W.2d 874, 881-82 (1943). | 1 | 1 |
Missouri International Investigators, Inc. v. City of Pacificgreen1 sentence1982Inv., Inc. v. City of Pacific, 545 S.W.2d 684, 685 [2] (Mo.App.1976) the court held that a violation of the mandatory provisions of § 432.070 makes an agreement void and unenforceable. | 1 | 1 |
Hoevelman v. Reorganized School District R2 of Crawford Countygreen1 sentence1976Needles v. Kansas City, 371 S.W.2d 300, 306 [5] (Mo.1963); Hoevelman v. Reorganized School District R2 of Crawford County, 452 S.W.2d 298, 301 [4] (Mo.App.1970). | 1 | 1 |
Burger v. City of Springfieldgreen1 sentence1967Needles v. Kansas City, Mo., 371 S. W.2d 300, 306-307 [5-9]; Burger v. City of Springfield, Mo., 323 S.W.2d 777, 782-783 [1, 2]. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bride v. City of Slater
green
2 sentences1954Of the several contentions presented, we think the only one that need be considered is the contention that the opinion is in conflict with Bride v. City of Slater, Mo., 263 S.W.2d 22, 28 , wherein it was held the city could not recover the money voluntarily paid for fuel oil accepted and used by the city under a contract which was void because it did not meet the mandatory requirements of § 432.070 (quoted in the opinion), requiring the consideration to be in writing. 1954Of the several contentions presented, we think the only one that need be considered is the contention that the opinion is in conflict with Bride v. City of Slater, Mo., 263 S.W.2d 22, 28 , wherein it was held the city could not recover the money voluntarily paid for fuel oil accepted and used by the city under a contract which was void because it did not meet the mandatory requirements of § 432.070 (quoted in the opinion), requiring the consideration to be in writing. | 1 | 1954–1954 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.