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 1993–2022 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Duvall v. Lawrencegreen2 sentences2014The essence of an abuse of process claim is not the commencement of an action without justification, but rather the misuse of process to accomplish an unlawful end or ―compel the opposite party to do some collateral thing which he could not be compelled to do legally.‖ Duvall v. Lawrence, 86 S.W.3d 74, 85 (Mo. App. E.D. 2002). 2010Duvall v. Lawrence, 86 S.W.3d 74, 84-85 (Mo.App. | 2 | 2 |
Trustees of Clayton Terrace Subdivision, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. 6 Clayton Terrace, LLC, and Jeannette R. Huey, Trustee of the Jane R. Huey Lifetime Trust Agreement Dated May 21, 1998, Appellants/Cross-Respondents.green2 sentences2022GS Hospitality cites Trustees of Clayton Terrace Subdivision v. 6 Clayton Terrace, LLC as authority for the elements that a claimant is required to prove for an abuse of process claim: “(1) the present defendant made an illegal, improper, perverted use of process, a use neither warranted nor authorized by the process; (2) the defendant had an improper purpose in exercising such illegal, perverted or improper use of 7 process; and (3) damage resulted.” 585 S.W.3d 269 , 277 (Mo. banc 2019) (internal quotation marks omitted). 2021Trustees of Clayton Terrace, 585 S.W.3d at 278. | 1 | 2 |
Diehl v. Fred Weber, Inc.green2 sentences2018While an abuse of process claim focuses on the "misuse of process for an end other than that it was designed to accomplish[,]" malicious prosecution focuses on "the commencement of an action without justification[.]" Diehl , 309 S.W.3d at 320 (citations omitted). 2015We find guidance in Diehl v. Fred Weber, Inc., 309 S.W.3d 309 (Mo.App. 2010), which reversed a summary judgment against a similar abuse of process claim. | 1 | 2 |
Moffett v. Commerce Trust Companygreen2 sentences2019“The ulterior motive may be inferred from the wrongful use made of the process, but the use itself may not be inferred from the motive.” Id. at 599 (quotations omitted). 2019The test for liability in an abuse of process claim is “whether the process has been used to accomplish some unlawful end, or to compel the defendant to do some collateral thing which he could not legally be compelled to do.” Moffett v. Commerce Trust Co., 283 S.W.2d 591, 600 (Mo. 1955) (quotations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Boyer v. Carondelet Savings & Loan Ass'ngreen1 sentence2017Mo. 1992) (citing Boyer v. Carondelet Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 633 S.W.2d 98, 101 (Mo. App. 1982), for the proposition that allegations in a petition that a party maliciously commenced a civil suit do not satisfy the pleading requirement for an abuse of process claim). . | 1 | 1 |
Herring v. Behlmanngreen1 sentence2014Even if the defendant had a bad motive, a claim for abuse of process does not lie where the defendant‘s use of legal process was within her legal rights or if she has ―done nothing more than pursue a lawsuit to its authorized conclusion.‖ Pipefitters Health & Welfare Trust v. Waldo R., Inc., 760 S.W.2d 196, 198 (Mo. App. E.D. 1988); Herring v. Behlmann, 734 S.W.2d 311, 313-314 (Mo. App. E.D. 1987). | 1 | 1 |
Pipefitters Health & Welfare Trust v. Waldo R., Inc.green1 sentence2014Even if the defendant had a bad motive, a claim for abuse of process does not lie where the defendant‘s use of legal process was within her legal rights or if she has ―done nothing more than pursue a lawsuit to its authorized conclusion.‖ Pipefitters Health & Welfare Trust v. Waldo R., Inc., 760 S.W.2d 196, 198 (Mo. App. E.D. 1988); Herring v. Behlmann, 734 S.W.2d 311, 313-314 (Mo. App. E.D. 1987). | 1 | 1 |
Romeo v. Jonesgreen1 sentence2008Romeo v. Jones, 144 S.W.3d 324, 330 (Mo.App.2004). | 1 | 1 |
Welch v. Continental Placement, Inc.green1 sentence1993Welch v. Continental Placement, Inc., 627 S.W.2d 319, 321 (Mo.App.1982). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
R. Rowland & Co. v. Smith
green
1 sentence2022Rowland & Co. v. Smith, 698 S.W.2d 48 (Mo. App. 1985). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Halle v. Banner Industries of N.E., Inc.
green
2 sentences2019In his dissent, Judge Thompson opined that Dr. Maggard should have been permitted to maintain an abuse of process claim based on Dr. Kinney's KBML grievance in accordance with the Court of Appeals' holding in Halle v. Banner Industries of N.E., Inc., 453 S.W.3d 179 (Ky. App. 2014). 2019In his dissent, Judge Thompson opined that Dr. Maggard should have been permitted to maintain an abuse of process claim based on Dr. Kinney's KBML grievance in accordance with the Court of Appeals' holding in Halle v. Banner Industries of N.E., Inc., 453 S.W.3d 179 (Ky. App. 2014). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
JOHN T. IMPEY v. LARRY JOE HART, L. J. HART and COMPANY, MICHAEL A. CLITHERO, TIMOTHY JOHN McFARLAN, DEREK A. ANKROM, JASON SMITH, and HUSCH BLACKWELL
green
1 sentence2018A plaintiff who brings an abuse of process claim must establish "(1) an illegal, improper, perverted use of process, (2) done for an improper purpose, (3) resulting in damage." Id. (citation omitted). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Romeo v. Jones
green
1 sentence2018In Romeo , the court concluded that summary judgment on the Appellants' abuse of process claim was precluded by evidence that the lawsuit "was to shut Appellants up[,]" a letter from the attorney stating that the lawsuit had "been successful in quieting Appellants[,]" and a letter from the attorney stating "that he had been able 'to orchestrate a continuance' " so that his client would "be through with his efforts to develop and sell so that there will be little to risk in dismissing the case." Romeo , 86 S.W.3d at 433 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Lindenman v. Umscheid
green
2 sentences2016Lindenman v. Umscheid, 255 Kan. 610, 621 , 875 P.2d 964 (1994); Bloom v. Arnold, 45 Kan.App.2d 225, 231 , 248 P.3d 752 (2011) (explaining that abuse of process claims must involve a judicial proceeding, not an administrative proceeding carried on wholly outside of the court system). 2016Lindenman v. Umscheid, 255 Kan. 610, 621 , 875 P.2d 964 (1994); Bloom v. Arnold, 45 Kan.App.2d 225, 231 , 248 P.3d 752 (2011) (explaining that abuse of process claims must involve a judicial proceeding, not an administrative proceeding carried on wholly outside of the court system). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Bloom v. Arnold
green
2 sentences2016Moreover, Bloom specifically examined Lindenman , and the Kansas Court of Appeals explained, “[b]ecause our Supreme Court was not presented with the issue [of whether administrative proceedings satisfy the ‘legal proceeding1 requirement in an abuse of process claim], we do not believe the decision in Lindenman undercuts the prevailing law in Kansas limiting ‘legal process’ to only those proceedings that invoke the aid of judicial process.” Bloom, 45 Kan.App.2d at 232 , 248 P.3d 752 . 2016Moreover, Bloom specifically examined Lindenman , and the Kansas Court of Appeals explained, “[b]ecause our Supreme Court was not presented with the issue [of whether administrative proceedings satisfy the ‘legal proceeding1 requirement in an abuse of process claim], we do not believe the decision in Lindenman undercuts the prevailing law in Kansas limiting ‘legal process’ to only those proceedings that invoke the aid of judicial process.” Bloom, 45 Kan.App.2d at 232 , 248 P.3d 752 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Guirl v. Guirl
green
1 sentence2012Id. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
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.