party claiming instructional error (Missouri) · Go Syfert
← Missouri issues

party claiming instructional error in Missouri

17 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2024 1 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.

Followed or applied (9)

CaseFollowedCited
Hein v. Oriental Gardens, Inc.green
moctapp · 1999 · cited in 4 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2000–2009
2 sentences

2009The party claiming instructional error has the burden of proving “ ‘that the instruction as submitted misdirected, misled, or confused the jury.’ ” Id. (quoting Hein v. Oriental Gardens, Inc., 988 S.W.2d 632, 634 (Mo.App.

2007The party claiming instructional error has the task of showing “ ‘that the instruction as submitted misdirected, misled or confused the jury.’ ” Martens v. White, 195 S.W.3d 548, 557 (Mo.App.2006) (quoting Hein v. Oriental Gardens, Inc., 988 S.W.2d 632, 634 (Mo.App.1999)).

34
Sorrell v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.green
mo · 2008 · cited in 3 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2016–2017
2 sentences

2017Co., 249 S.W.3d 207, 209 (Mo. banc 2008).

2016Co., 249 S.W.3d 207, 209 (Mo. banc 2008) (“To reverse on grounds of instructional error, the party claiming instructional error must establish that the instruction at issue misdirected, mislead, or confused the jury.

33
Howard v. City of Kansas Citygreen
mo · 2011 · cited in 3 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2014–2024
2 sentences

2024“We will reverse the verdict ‘only if the party claiming instructional error establishes that the instructions at issue misdirected, misled, or confused the jury, resulting in prejudicial error.”” Jd. (quoting Howard v. City of Kansas City, 332 S.W.3d 772, 790 (Mo. banc 2011)).

2015This Court will only reverse a verdict for instructional error “if the party claiming instructional error establishes that the instruction at issue misdirected, misled, or confused the jury, resulting in prejudicial error.” Id. at 790 .

13
Martens v. Whitegreen
moctapp · 2006 · cited in 2 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2007–2009
2 sentences

2009The party claiming instructional error has the burden of proving “ ‘that the instruction as submitted misdirected, misled, or confused the jury.’ ” Id. (quoting Hein v. Oriental Gardens, Inc., 988 S.W.2d 632, 634 (Mo.App.

2007The party claiming instructional error has the task of showing “ ‘that the instruction as submitted misdirected, misled or confused the jury.’ ” Martens v. White, 195 S.W.3d 548, 557 (Mo.App.2006) (quoting Hein v. Oriental Gardens, Inc., 988 S.W.2d 632, 634 (Mo.App.1999)).

12
Steward v. ABU BONDING INC.green
moctapp · 2007 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011Kan., 240 S.W.3d 175, 183 (Mo.App.

11
Jone v. Coleman Co.green
moctapp · 2005 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
1 sentence

2009Jone v. Coleman Corp., 183 S.W.3d 600, 605 (Mo.App.

11
Alexander v. American Lodging, Inc.green
moctapp · 1990 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
1 sentence

2000Wal-Mart argues that it was not required to remove any naturally accumulating snow or ice which constituted a condition general to the community, citing authorities such as Maxwell v. City of Hayti 985 S.W.2d 920, 921-22 (Mo.App. 1999); Alexander v. American Lodging Inc., 786 S.W.2d 599, 601 (Mo.App.1990); Milford v. May Dept.

11
Maxwell v. City of Haytigreen
moctapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
1 sentence

2000Wal-Mart argues that it was not required to remove any naturally accumulating snow or ice which constituted a condition general to the community, citing authorities such as Maxwell v. City of Hayti 985 S.W.2d 920, 921-22 (Mo.App. 1999); Alexander v. American Lodging Inc., 786 S.W.2d 599, 601 (Mo.App.1990); Milford v. May Dept.

11
Judy v. Arkansas Log Homes, Inc.green
moctapp · 1996 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
1 sentence

1999Judy v. Arkansas Log Homes, Inc., 923 S.W.2d 409, 420 (Mo.App.1996).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
City of Harrisonville, Appellant-Respondent v. McCall Service Stations d/b/a Big Tank Oil, the Missouri Petroleum Storage Tank Insurance Fund green
mo · 2016
1 sentence

2017Id.

12017–2017
Fleshner v. Pepose Vision Institute, P.C. green
mo · 2010
2 sentences

2016Fleshner, 304 S.W.3d at 90-91 .

2016Fleshner, 304 S.W.3d at 90-91 .

12016–2016
Harvey v. Washington green
mo · 2003
1 sentence

2011Id.

12011–2011
Gorman v. Walmart Stores, Inc. green
moctapp · 2000
1 sentence

2005Id.

12005–2005

Where else courts name it

MO 17 (1999–2024) CA 3 (2015–2026)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check