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.
10 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1894–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cannon v. Cannongreen1 sentence2015See Cannon v. Cannon, 280 S.W.3d 79, 87 (Mo. banc 2009) (stating that “once they reach the age of majority, the limitations [placed on visitation rights of parents convicted of certain crimes] put in place to protect the children’s best interests no longer will be relevant.”). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Mimsgreen1 sentence1988State v. Mims, 674 S.W.2d 536, 538 (Mo. banc 1984). | 1 | 1 |
George A. Cunningham v. Jerome Gans, D/B/A Atlanta Engineering Companygreen1 sentence1978See Cunningham v. Gans, 507 F.2d 496 (2nd Cir. 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 |
|---|---|---|
Donnan v. Donnan
green
1 sentence1992Donnan v. Donnan, 264 S.W.2d 318 (Mo.1954); Shaffer v. Cochenour, 569 S.W.2d 320 (Mo.App.1978). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Shaffer v. Cochenour
green
1 sentence1992Donnan v. Donnan, 264 S.W.2d 318 (Mo.1954); Shaffer v. Cochenour, 569 S.W.2d 320 (Mo.App.1978). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Voegtlin v. State
green
1 sentence1988Gun-ter concedes that perjury which is unknown to the prosecution will not support a post-conviction request for the vacation of a conviction, citing Voegtlin v. State, 546 S.W.2d 40 (Mo.App.1977), but urges us to “reconsider a well established principle of law in the State of Missouri.” We could not do so, even if we thought a relaxation of the requirement of prosecutorial knowledge of perjury was justified, as the Supreme Court of Missouri has spoken on the issue, and has concluded that deliberate or conscious use of perjured testimony by a prosecutor must be shown before a due process viola | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Wolfe v. Harms
green
1 sentence1983Wolfe v. Harms, 413 S.W.2d 204 (Mo.1967); Scheibel v. Hillis, 570 S.W.2d 724 (Mo.App.1978). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Federal National Mortgage Ass'n v. Howlett
green
1 sentence1983Also see Federal National Mortgage Ass’n v. Howlett, 521 S.W.2d 428 (Mo. banc 1975); Abrams v. Lakewood Park Cemetery Ass’n., supra. Nonetheless, the relaxation of the requirement of absolute strict compliance with the terms of the deed of trust has continued to be applied under the lien theory. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Scheibel v. Hillis
green
1 sentence1983Wolfe v. Harms, 413 S.W.2d 204 (Mo.1967); Scheibel v. Hillis, 570 S.W.2d 724 (Mo.App.1978). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Merchants Mutual Casualty Co. v. Lambert
green
2 sentences1969Casualty Co. v. Lambert, 90 N.H. 507 , 11 A.2d 361 , 127 A.L.R. 483 , where no disposition had been made of the listed vehicle and it was legally operable, in the sense that it was registered and could therefore be operated under the state law on the highways of the state. 1969Casualty Co. v. Lambert, 90 N.H. 507 , 11 A.2d 361 , 127 A.L.R. 483 , where no disposition had been made of the listed vehicle and it was legally operable, in the sense that it was registered and could therefore be operated under the state law on the highways of the state. | 1 | 1969–1969 |
State Ex Rel. Fabrico v. Trimble
neutral
2 sentences1931Fabrico v. Trimble, 309 Mo. 415 , 274 S.W. 712 . *Page 161 The rule, as stated in the decisions, appears to be absolute, and without qualification or exception; but if there may be a case presenting facts which would warrant a relaxation of the rule the evidence would have to be cogent and convincing, excluding all reasonable doubt. 1931Fabrico v. Trimble, 309 Mo. 415 , 274 S.W. 712 . *Page 161 The rule, as stated in the decisions, appears to be absolute, and without qualification or exception; but if there may be a case presenting facts which would warrant a relaxation of the rule the evidence would have to be cogent and convincing, excluding all reasonable doubt. | 1 | 1931–1931 |
Hilliker v. Francisco
neutral
1 sentence1895This con cession in favor of the sucontractor, which is recognized in Hilliker v. Francisco, 65 Mo. 598 , and subsequent cases, can be supported only on the theory that the owner, having appropriated the subcontractor’s work and materials, impliedly charges his land with the additional value of which he has received the benefit. | 1 | 1895–1895 |
State v. McO'Blenis
green
1 sentence1894This relaxation of the rule and its precise limits are accurately set forth in State v. McO’Blenis, 21 Mo. 272 , and in Mentzing v. Railroad, 64 Mo. 25 . | 1 | 1894–1894 |
Mentzing v. Pacific R. R.
neutral
1 sentence1894This relaxation of the rule and its precise limits are accurately set forth in State v. McO’Blenis, 21 Mo. 272 , and in Mentzing v. Railroad, 64 Mo. 25 . | 1 | 1894–1894 |
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.