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.
16 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1878–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Crippled Children Services v. Griffittsgreen2 sentences2013"Subrogation is defined as the substitution of one person in the place of another with reference to a lawful claim or right.” Estate of Griffitts, 938 S.W.2d 621, 624 (Mo.App. 1997Estate of Griffitts, 938 S.W.2d 621, 624 (Mo.App.1997). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Boldengreen1 sentence2019See Bolden, 371 S.W.3d at 806 ; Clay, 533 S.W.3d at 715 ; and Oudin, 403 S.W.3d at 698 n.10. | 1 | 1 |
Lastofka v. Lastofkagreen2 sentences2012See, e.g., Lastofka v. Lastofka, 339 Mo. 770 , 99 S.W.2d 46, 58 (1936). 2012See, e.g., Lastofka v. Lastofka, 339 Mo. 770 , 99 S.W.2d 46, 58 (1936). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Christiegreen1 sentence2010A defendant is only entitled to acquittal as a matter of law when the evidence establishing self-defense is undisputed and uncontradict-ed. State v. Christie, 604 S.W.2d 806, 808 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
American Nursing Resources, Inc. v. Forrest T. Jones & Co.green1 sentence1997Jones & Co., Inc., 812 S.W.2d 790, 794 (Mo.App.1991). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kennedygreen2 sentences1977Daisy Knox “bore no such relation to the defendant as would authorize him to wreak his vengeance upon the deceased for some alleged wrong upon her.” State v. Kennedy, 207 Mo. 528 , 106 S.W. 57, 60 (1907). 1977Daisy Knox “bore no such relation to the defendant as would authorize him to wreak his vengeance upon the deceased for some alleged wrong upon her.” State v. Kennedy, 207 Mo. 528 , 106 S.W. 57, 60 (1907). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Slatengreen1 sentence1965See State v. Slaten, Mo.Sup., 252 S.W.2d 330 ; State v. Westmoreland, Mo.Sup., 126 S.W.2d 202 [5]. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hornsby
green
2 sentences2006Z.T.H., 910 S.W.2d at 835 . 2006Z.T.H., 910 S.W.2d at 835 . | 2 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Oudin
green
1 sentence2019See Bolden, 371 S.W.3d at 806 ; Clay, 533 S.W.3d at 715 ; and Oudin, 403 S.W.3d at 698 n.10. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Firestone Textile Co. Division v. Meadows
green
1 sentence2019In that case, we stated that the Workers' Compensation Act evidenced "a public policy that an employee has a right to be free to assert a lawful claim for benefits without suffering retaliatory discharge." 666 S.W.2d at 732 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Clay
green
1 sentence2019See Bolden, 371 S.W.3d at 806 ; Clay, 533 S.W.3d at 715 ; and Oudin, 403 S.W.3d at 698 n.10. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Friendship Village of South County v. Public Service Commission
green
1 sentence2009Friendship Village, 907 S.W.2d at 348 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Milentz
green
1 sentence1977The following statement in State v. Milentz, 521 S.W.2d at 3 , involving an assault on a police officer, is remarkably appropriate: “This record discloses the case of an intoxicated, distraught, hostile, belligerent, violent and dangerous man on a rampage; a man . . . who hates the police, and who expressed his contempt for the police by every vocal and physical means at his disposal .; a vengeful person making an unprovoked attack upon an officer who had given appellant no reason to act as he did.” | 1 | 1977–1977 |
State v. Tindall
green
1 sentence1977Once the issue is raised, the burden of proof is on the state to prove the defendant did not act in the lawful defense of another. 1 State v. Tindall, 496 S.W.2d 267 (Mo.App.1973). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
United States v. Frank Rich
green
1 sentence1977Other such holdings include United States v. Rich, 262 F.2d 415 (2d Cir. 1959); United States v. Baker, 419 F.2d 83 (2d Cir. 1969); and United States v. Varelli, 407 F.2d 735 (7th Cir. 1969). 2 . § 559.040(2): “When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of his or her husband or wife, parent, child, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, master, mistress, apprentice or servant, when there shall be reasonable cause to apprehend a design to commit a felony, or to do some great personal injury, and there shall be reasonable cause to apprehend immediate danger of such design bein | 1 | 1977–1977 |
cluster 283689
green
1 sentence1977Other such holdings include United States v. Rich, 262 F.2d 415 (2d Cir. 1959); United States v. Baker, 419 F.2d 83 (2d Cir. 1969); and United States v. Varelli, 407 F.2d 735 (7th Cir. 1969). 2 . § 559.040(2): “When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of his or her husband or wife, parent, child, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, master, mistress, apprentice or servant, when there shall be reasonable cause to apprehend a design to commit a felony, or to do some great personal injury, and there shall be reasonable cause to apprehend immediate danger of such design bein | 1 | 1977–1977 |
United States v. Edward Baker, Ralph Masciola and Dominick Dinorscio
green
1 sentence1977Other such holdings include United States v. Rich, 262 F.2d 415 (2d Cir. 1959); United States v. Baker, 419 F.2d 83 (2d Cir. 1969); and United States v. Varelli, 407 F.2d 735 (7th Cir. 1969). 2 . § 559.040(2): “When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of his or her husband or wife, parent, child, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, master, mistress, apprentice or servant, when there shall be reasonable cause to apprehend a design to commit a felony, or to do some great personal injury, and there shall be reasonable cause to apprehend immediate danger of such design bein | 1 | 1977–1977 |
State v. Ledbetter
green
2 sentences1936State’s Instruction No. 3 reads as follows: “The court instructs the jury that bearing in mind the foregoing definition, if you find and believe from the evidence in this cause, that at the County of Washington' and State of Missouri, that on or about the 2nd day of August, 1934, the defendant, Rebecca Whitchurch, without just cause or provocation and under such circumstances as not being justifiable or excusable homicide and not in the lawful defense of her person, as such'defense is explained in'another instruction given herein, did willfully, premeditatedly and of her malice aforethought, b 1936State’s Instruction No. 3 reads as follows: “The court instructs the jury that bearing in mind the foregoing definition, if you find and believe from the evidence in this cause, that at the County of Washington' and State of Missouri, that on or about the 2nd day of August, 1934, the defendant, Rebecca Whitchurch, without just cause or provocation and under such circumstances as not being justifiable or excusable homicide and not in the lawful defense of her person, as such'defense is explained in'another instruction given herein, did willfully, premeditatedly and of her malice aforethought, b | 1 | 1936–1936 |
City of St. Louis v. Bissell
neutral
1 sentence1878Louis v. Bissell, 46 Mo. 157 , a similar covenant, that the grantor “shall and will warrant and defend the title to the said premises unto the said party of the second part, its successors and assigns, against the lawful claim and demand of all persons whomsoever ” (such is the language in that deed), was held to be a covenant against encumbrances, damages for the breach of which depend upon the value of the encumbrance, without reference to the value of the laud or the purchase-money, the covenantee being held there (as we hold him in the present case) entitled to recover what he paid to exti | 1 | 1878–1878 |
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.