24 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1958–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lovelace v. Reedgreen2 sentences1992Lovelace v. Reed, 486 S.W.2d 417, 419 (Mo.1972). 1978A lookout instruction submits failure to see and failure to avoid injury “by ‘any means supported by the evidence.’ ” Lovelace v. Reed, 486 S.W.2d 417, 419 (Mo.1972). | 3 | 3 |
Hawkins v. Whittenberggreen2 sentences1986Hawkins v. Whittenberg, 587 S.W.2d 358, 361 (Mo.App.1979). 1980Hawkins v. Whittenberg, 587 S.W.2d 358, 361 (Mo.App.1979); Butler v. Hicks, 554 S.W.2d 449, 451 (Mo.App.1977); See Bolhofner v. Jones, 482 S.W.2d 80 , 82 & 83 (Mo.App.1972). | 2 | 2 |
Moore v. Ready Mixed Concrete Companygreen2 sentences1965(Moore v. Ready Mixed Concrete Company, Mo., 329 S.W.2d 14, 25 [9-10]; see also the now effective Missouri Approved Instructions, §§ 17.02 and 17.05.) We do not take the rule to mean that there is a submissible case without sufficient facts and circumstances, from which, at least, a permissible inference could be made and a jury could find, that such manner and means of avoidance existed. 1964“In that type of submission it is generally considered sufficient to hypothesize failure to keep a lookout and require a finding that such failure was negligence and directly caused the collision.” Moore v. Ready Mixed Concrete Co., Mo. Sup., 329 S.W.2d 14, 25 . | 1 | 2 |
Spann ex rel. Spann v. Jacksongreen1 sentence2014Spann v. Jackson, 84 S.W.3d 478, 481 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. City of Hannibalgreen1 sentence2012“The party seeking a ‘failure to keep a lookout’ instruction has the burden of showing that the other party could have reacted in time to avoid the accident had he or she been keeping a careful lookout.” Smith v. City of Hannibal, 297 S.W.3d 926, 928, n. 3 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Evansgreen2 sentences2005Id. at 853 . 2005Id. at 695. | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Christiangreen2 sentences2003In Williams v. Christian, 520 S.W.2d 139 (Mo.App.1974), the issue was whether the trial court erred in refusing plaintiff's failure to keep a lookout instruction and giving instead a res ipsa instruction that the defendant contended was even more favorable to the plaintiff. 2003In Williams v. Christian, 520 S.W.2d 139 (Mo.App.1974), the issue was whether the trial court erred in refusing plaintiff’s failure to keep a lookout instruction and giving instead a res ipsa instruction that the defendant contended was even more favorable to the plaintiff. | 1 | 1 |
Giddens v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.green1 sentence1998Co., 937 S.W.2d 300, 308-09 (Mo.App.1996). | 1 | 1 |
Allen v. Andrewsgreen2 sentences1991See also Allen v. Andrews, 599 S.W.2d 262, 265 (Mo.App.1980) (the lookout instruction "presupposes the time and means to take effective precautionary action"). 1991See also Allen v. Andrews, 599 S.W.2d 262, 265 (Mo.App.1980) (the lookout instruction “presupposes the time and means to take effective precautionary action”). | 1 | 1 |
Williamson ex rel. Williamson v. Eppersongreen1 sentence1980Williamson v. Epperson, 529 S.W.2d 25, 30 (Mo.App.1975). | 1 | 1 |
Butler v. Hicksgreen1 sentence1980Hawkins v. Whittenberg, 587 S.W.2d 358, 361 (Mo.App.1979); Butler v. Hicks, 554 S.W.2d 449, 451 (Mo.App.1977); See Bolhofner v. Jones, 482 S.W.2d 80 , 82 & 83 (Mo.App.1972). | 1 | 1 |
Bolhofner v. Jonesgreen1 sentence1980Hawkins v. Whittenberg, 587 S.W.2d 358, 361 (Mo.App.1979); Butler v. Hicks, 554 S.W.2d 449, 451 (Mo.App.1977); See Bolhofner v. Jones, 482 S.W.2d 80 , 82 & 83 (Mo.App.1972). | 1 | 1 |
Watterson Ex Rel. Watterson v. Portasgreen1 sentence1979See Watterson v. Portas, supra. The evidence merits submitting a lookout instruction and failure to do so was error. | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. St. Louis Public Service Companygreen1 sentence1977Louis Public Service Company, 389 S.W.2d 769, 771 [3, 4] (Mo.1965), and cases cited, as to the necessity of evidence to support a lookout instruction in its essential element of causation. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stegall v. Wilson
green
2 sentences1978Appellant cites Janicke v. Hough, 400 S.W.2d 645 (Mo.App.1966); and Stegall v. Wilson, 416 S.W.2d 658 (Mo.App.1967), for her contention that the lookout instruction here had no evidence to support its submission. 1968Failure to do so amounts to negligence.” (Emphasis on last sentence ours.) Plaintiff also cites Stegall v. Wilson, Mo.App., 416 S.W.2d 658 , in support of his contention that a lookout instruction is not proper where the accident could not have been avoided notwithstanding a proper lookout. | 2 | 1968–1978 |
Hill v. Barton
green
2 sentences2013Here, in granting Baska’s motion for a directed verdict, the circuit court reasoned that, as to Saunders’s failure to keep a lookout claim, Webb’s and Baska’s testimony that Baska stopped and looked both ways was “uncontroverted and uncontested” and “reflect[ed] that Ms. Baska did keep a careful lookout.” However, “[m]erely looking does not fulfill one’s duty to keep a careful lookout.” Id. “ ‘A person is required to look in such an observant manner as to enable him to see what one in the exercise of the highest degree of care could and should have seen.’ ” Id. (emphasis added) (quoting Hill, 2013Here, in granting Baska’s motion for a directed verdict, the circuit court reasoned that, as to Saunders’s failure to keep a lookout claim, Webb’s and Baska’s testimony that Baska stopped and looked both ways was “uncontroverted and uncontested” and “reflect[ed] that Ms. Baska did keep a careful lookout.” However, “[m]erely looking does not fulfill one’s duty to keep a careful lookout.” Id. “ ‘A person is required to look in such an observant manner as to enable him to see what one in the exercise of the highest degree of care could and should have seen.’ ” Id. (emphasis added) (quoting Hill, | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Wendt v. General Accident Insurance Co.
green
1 sentence2002Id. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Pringle v. State Highway Commission
green
1 sentence2001Id. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Morgan v. Toomey
green
2 sentences1991Morgan, 719 S.W.2d at 133 . 1991Morgan, 719 S.W.2d at 133 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Shelton v. Bruner
green
2 sentences1986Although a lookout in- struction need not hypothesize the means by which the driver, charged with failing to keep a careful lookout, could have avoided the collision, the evidence must support a finding that he possessed and failed to use such means.... ‘Having the means and ability to avoid a collision means not only the mechanical appliances, such as steering apparatus with which to swerve, signalling equipment with which to warn, or braking appliances with which to slow down or stop, but also the existence of sufficient time and distance, considering the movements and speeds of the vehicles 1986Although a lookout in- struction need not hypothesize the means by which the driver, charged with failing to keep a careful lookout, could have avoided the collision, the evidence must support a finding that he possessed and failed to use such means.... ‘Having the means and ability to avoid a collision means not only the mechanical appliances, such as steering apparatus with which to swerve, signalling equipment with which to warn, or braking appliances with which to slow down or stop, but also the existence of sufficient time and distance, considering the movements and speeds of the vehicles | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Janicke v. Hough
neutral
1 sentence1978Appellant cites Janicke v. Hough, 400 S.W.2d 645 (Mo.App.1966); and Stegall v. Wilson, 416 S.W.2d 658 (Mo.App.1967), for her contention that the lookout instruction here had no evidence to support its submission. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Harris v. Mound City Yellow Cab Company
green
1 sentence1965In neither Herr nor Snider was failure to yield the right-of-way coupled with a proper lookout instruction as was the case with the instruction here involved and also in Garrison v. Ryno, supra. It has been held that a proper lookout instruction is “equivalent to a requirement that the jury find that the * * * driver (charged with the obligation) could have seen the other vehicle if he had looked.” Harris v. Mound City Yellow Cab Co., Mo.App., 367 S.W.2d 43, 50 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Garrison v. Ryno
green
1 sentence1965In neither Herr nor Snider was failure to yield the right-of-way coupled with a proper lookout instruction as was the case with the instruction here involved and also in Garrison v. Ryno, supra. It has been held that a proper lookout instruction is “equivalent to a requirement that the jury find that the * * * driver (charged with the obligation) could have seen the other vehicle if he had looked.” Harris v. Mound City Yellow Cab Co., Mo.App., 367 S.W.2d 43, 50 . | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Levin v. Caldwell
green
1 sentence1962In Levin v. Caldwell et al., Mo., 285 S.W.2d 655 , cited by appellant, which involved a lookout instruction in an intersection collision case, all the evidence showed that because of shrubbery at the corner, a side approaching car could not have been seen until it was within five feet of the intersection. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Happy v. Blanton
green
1 sentence1958Happy v. Blanton, Mo., 303 S.W.2d 633, 639 ; Knox v. Weathers, 363 Mo. 1167 , 257 S.W.2d 912 . | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Knox v. Weathers
green
2 sentences1958Happy v. Blanton, Mo., 303 S.W.2d 633, 639 ; Knox v. Weathers, 363 Mo. 1167 , 257 S.W.2d 912 . 1958Happy v. Blanton, Mo., 303 S.W.2d 633, 639 ; Knox v. Weathers, 363 Mo. 1167 , 257 S.W.2d 912 . | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.