12 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1888–2007 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wilson v. Shanksgreen2 sentences1991See, e.g., Wilson v. Shanks, 785 S.W.2d 282, 285 (Mo. banc 1990). 1991Wilson v. Shanks, 785 S.W.2d 282, 285 (Mo. banc 1990); see also Titsworth, 776 S.W.2d at 423 . | 2 | 2 |
Heberer v. Duncangreen1 sentence2007See Heberer v. Duncan, 449 S.W.2d 561, 563 (Mo. banc 1970). | 1 | 1 |
Berra v. Union Electric Co.green1 sentence1995Berra v. Union Electric Co., 803 S.W.2d 188, 190 (Mo.App.1991). | 1 | 1 |
Titsworth v. Powellgreen1 sentence1991Wilson v. Shanks, 785 S.W.2d 282, 285 (Mo. banc 1990); see also Titsworth, 776 S.W.2d at 423 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gustafson v. Benda
green
2 sentences1985Since that time, Gustafson v. Benda, 661 S.W.2d 11 (Mo. banc 1983), adopted the doctrine of comparative negligence, upon which this case was submitted in the second trial. 1985Gustafson v. Benda, 661 S.W.2d 11 (Mo. banc 1983). | 2 | 1985–1985 |
McNeal v. Union Pacific Railroad
green
1 sentence1995Id. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Koch v. Bangert Bros. Road Builders, Inc.
green
1 sentence1986Road Builders, Inc., 697 S.W.2d 315 (Mo.App.1985), we held that under the comparative negligence doctrine now effective in this state, an error in giving a comparative fault instruction is harmless if the jury found no negligence on the part of the defendant. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
James Edward Clayton v. Robert T. Wade, Chief of Police, Etc.
green
1 sentence1984In Walker v. Trico Manufacturing Company, Inc., 487 F.2d 595 (1973), misuse, as an assumption of risk, of a blow-mold machine was not established where it was not shown *90 that plaintiff knew of the danger associated with an alleged defectively designed limit switch activated by her while her other hand was between the die faces. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Whitehead & Kales Co.
green
2 sentences1979Philosophically, I am persuaded that the doctrine of pure comparative negligence, like that of pure relative fault as it was first announced in Missouri Pacific v. Whitehead and Kales, 566 S.W.2d 466 (Mo. banc 1978), is far more attuned to the needs and realities of modern day society than our existing body of tort case law, rules and statutes. 1979Philosophically, I am persuaded that the doctrine of pure comparative negligence, like that of pure relative fault as it was first announced in Missouri Pacific v. Whitehead and Kales, 566 S.W.2d 466 (Mo. banc 1978), is far more attuned to the needs and realities of modern day society than our existing body of tort case law, rules and statutes. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Howard v. Scarritt Estate Co.
green
2 sentences1955Co., 329 Mo. 1190 , 49 S.W.2d 103 , and when it injected the comparative negligence doctrine, Howard v. Scarritt Estate Co., 267 Mo. 398 , 184 S.W. 1144 . 1955Co., 329 Mo. 1190 , 49 S.W.2d 103 , and when it injected the comparative negligence doctrine, Howard v. Scarritt Estate Co., 267 Mo. 398 , 184 S.W. 1144 . | 1 | 1955–1955 |
Perkins v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.
green
2 sentences1955Co., 329 Mo. 1190 , 49 S.W.2d 103 , and when it injected the comparative negligence doctrine, Howard v. Scarritt Estate Co., 267 Mo. 398 , 184 S.W. 1144 . 1955Co., 329 Mo. 1190 , 49 S.W.2d 103 , and when it injected the comparative negligence doctrine, Howard v. Scarritt Estate Co., 267 Mo. 398 , 184 S.W. 1144 . | 1 | 1955–1955 |
Welch v. McAllister
neutral
1 sentence1888As said by Thompson, J., in Welch v. McAllister, supra: “ There is no doctrine of comparative negligence in this state. | 1 | 1888–1888 |
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.