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.
9 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1901–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Watermann v. Eleanor E. Fitzpatrick Revocable Living Trustgreen2 sentences2015Fitzpatrick Revocable Living Trust, 369 S.W.3d 69, 75-76 (Mo. App. E.D. 2012), which noted: Through the use of this presumption, Missouri places a prima facie case requirement upon the party alleging undue influence which once satisfied, allows the party to submit the case to the jury. 2015Fitzpatrick Revocable Living Trust, 369 S.W.3d 69, 75-76 (Mo. App. E.D. 2012), which noted: Through the use of this presumption, Missouri places a prima facie case requirement upon the party alleging undue influence which once satisfied, allows the party to submit the case to the jury. | 3 | 3 |
Hodges v. Hodgesgreen1 sentence1991Essentially, through the use of a “presumption,” Missouri places a prima facie case requirement upon the party alleging undue influence which once satisfied, allows the party to submit the case to the jury, Hodges v. Hodges, 692 S.W.2d 361, 367 (Mo.App.1985). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Antwinegreen1 sentence1988Instead, the opinion remands for a determination as to the third prong of the prima facie case analysis established by State v. Antwine, 743 S.W.2d 51, 64 (Mo. banc 1987). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In the Estate of Meyer v. Presley
green
1 sentence2019Under the summary-judgment standard, this presumption “places a prima facie case requirement upon the party alleging undue influence[.]” Id. (internal citation omitted). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Duvall v. Brenizer
green
1 sentence2012Through the use of this presumption, “Missouri places a prima facie case requirement upon the party alleging undue influence which once satisfied, allows the party to submit the case to the jury.” Duvall, 818 S.W.2d at 335 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Di Paoli v. Prudential Insurance Company
green
1 sentence1983See among the many decisions, Sellars, supra, l.c. 405[1]; Ward, supra, l.c. 419[1]; Di Paoli, supra, l.c. 864[1-4]. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Ward v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company
green
1 sentence1983See among the many decisions, Sellars, supra, l.c. 405[1]; Ward, supra, l.c. 419[1]; Di Paoli, supra, l.c. 864[1-4]. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Oester v. Sitlington
neutral
1 sentence1901Ency. of Law (2 Ed.), 475 and 476; Johnson-Brinkman Co. v. Central Bank, 116 Mo. 558 ; Oester v. Sitlington, 115 Mo. 247 ; Ehrlich v. Aetna Ins. | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Johnson—Brinkman Commission Co. v. Central Bank
green
1 sentence1901Ency. of Law (2 Ed.), 475 and 476; Johnson-Brinkman Co. v. Central Bank, 116 Mo. 558 ; Oester v. Sitlington, 115 Mo. 247 ; Ehrlich v. Aetna Ins. | 1 | 1901–1901 |
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.