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.
14 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2023 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Woodall v. Director of Revenuegreen2 sentences1992See Woodall v. Director of Revenue, 795 S.W.2d 419 (Mo.App.1990) 1 . 1992Sellenriek v. Director of Revenue, 826 S.W.2d 338 (Mo. banc 1992); Woodall v. Director of Revenue, 795 S.W.2d 419 (Mo.App.1990). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Bartholomewgreen1 sentence2005Id. at 53. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hanrahangreen1 sentence1984See generally: State v. Bush, 595 S.W.2d 386, 388 (Mo.App.1980); State v. Hanrahan, 523 S.W.2d 619, 621 (Mo.App.1975); and State v. Milligan, 516 S.W.2d 795, 797-98 (Mo.App.1974). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Bushgreen1 sentence1984See generally: State v. Bush, 595 S.W.2d 386, 388 (Mo.App.1980); State v. Hanrahan, 523 S.W.2d 619, 621 (Mo.App.1975); and State v. Milligan, 516 S.W.2d 795, 797-98 (Mo.App.1974). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Milligangreen1 sentence1984See generally: State v. Bush, 595 S.W.2d 386, 388 (Mo.App.1980); State v. Hanrahan, 523 S.W.2d 619, 621 (Mo.App.1975); and State v. Milligan, 516 S.W.2d 795, 797-98 (Mo.App.1974). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hilkemeyer v. Director of Revenue
green
1 sentence2023Hilkemeyer, 353 S.W.3d at 67 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
White v. Director of Revenue
green
1 sentence2023The Southern District of this Court affirmed the judgment because (1) the Driver had no obligation to prove that something occurred during the fifteen-minute observation period that could have interfered with the results of the breathalyzer test, pursuant to the then-recently decided Missouri Supreme Court case, White, 321 S.W.3d at 306 ; and (2) the Director's argument that the trial court erroneously limited the term "observe" to the "sense of sight" was unsupported by the record. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Nelson v. Waxman
green
1 sentence2011“The admissibility of evidence lies within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent abuse of discretion.” Nelson, 9 S.W.3d at 603 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Vernon v. Director of Revenue
green
2 sentences2005Id. at 911 . 2005Id. at 907 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Stuhr v. Director of Revenue
green
1 sentence2002The Missouri Supreme Court considered this issue in Stuhr v. Director of Revenue, 766 S.W.2d 446 (Mo. banc 1989). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Young v. Director of Revenue
green
1 sentence1999Id. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Bradford v. Director of Revenue
green
1 sentence1992Id. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Sellenriek v. Director of Revenue
green
1 sentence1992Sellenriek v. Director of Revenue, 826 S.W.2d 338 (Mo. banc 1992); Woodall v. Director of Revenue, 795 S.W.2d 419 (Mo.App.1990). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Collins v. Director of Revenue
green
1 sentence1986The court’s ruling is inconsistent with the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court in Collins v. Director of Revenue, 691 S.W.2d 246 (Mo. banc 1985). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
State v. Edmonds
green
1 sentence1978State v. Edmonds, supra. Appellant charges the court erred (II) in permitting Trooper Baker to testify to the results of the breathalyzer test he gave defendant. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
State v. Kramme
green
1 sentence1975State v. Kramme, supra. The judgment is affirmed. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
State v. Kissinger
green
2 sentences1972The cases cited by appellant are either inapplicable on their facts or, as in the cases of State v. Kissinger, 343 Mo. 781 , 123 S.W. 2d 81 , and State v. Chester, supra, they confirm our conclusion. 1972The cases cited by appellant are either inapplicable on their facts or, as in the cases of State v. Kissinger, 343 Mo. 781 , 123 S.W. 2d 81 , and State v. Chester, supra, they confirm our conclusion. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
State v. Chester
green
1 sentence1972The cases cited by appellant are either inapplicable on their facts or, as in the cases of State v. Kissinger, 343 Mo. 781 , 123 S.W. 2d 81 , and State v. Chester, supra, they confirm our conclusion. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
State v. Corsiglia
green
1 sentence1969State v. Corsiglia, Mo.App., 435 S.W.2d 430 . | 1 | 1969–1969 |
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.
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.