64 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1886–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Colegreen1 sentence2011State v. Cole, 248 S.W.3d 91, 94-95 (Mo.App.2008). | 1 | 1 |
Gulf Insurance Co. v. Noble Broadcastgreen1 sentence2002Co. v. Noble Broad., 936 S.W.2d 810, 816 (Mo. banc 1997)). | 1 | 1 |
Rinehart v. Andersongreen2 sentences2002This court has held that an insured, faced with a refusal of a defense by their insurer, “is justified in reaching a settlement which enables the insured to be released from personal liability.” Rinehart *325 v. Anderson, 985 S.W.2d 363, 371 (Mo.App.1998). 10 Indeed, “An insured, ‘although not engaging in collusive conduct for fraudulent or deceitful purpose, may act in a self-interested way in an attempt to protect himself from personal liability.’ ” Id. (quoting Gulf Ins. 2002This court has held that an insured, faced with a refusal of a defense by their insurer, “is justified in reaching a settlement which enables the insured to be released from personal liability.” Rinehart *325 v. Anderson, 985 S.W.2d 363, 371 (Mo.App.1998). 10 Indeed, “An insured, ‘although not engaging in collusive conduct for fraudulent or deceitful purpose, may act in a self-interested way in an attempt to protect himself from personal liability.’ ” Id. (quoting Gulf Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Hackman v. Kindrickgreen1 sentence2001Hackman v. Kindrick, 882 S.W.2d 157, 159 (Mo.App.1994); Titsworth v. Powell, 776 S.W.2d 416, 423 (Mo.App.1989). | 1 | 1 |
Titsworth v. Powellgreen1 sentence2001Hackman v. Kindrick, 882 S.W.2d 157, 159 (Mo.App.1994); Titsworth v. Powell, 776 S.W.2d 416, 423 (Mo.App.1989). | 1 | 1 |
Harris v. Woolworthgreen1 sentence1994Harris v. Woolworth, 824 S.W.2d 31, 34 [6] (Mo.App.1991). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Waltongreen1 sentence1993The time saved by not doing so is not worth the serious risk it involves to defendant’s right to an impartial jury, which, if violated, inevitably results in having to try the case over again.” In State v. Walton, 796 S.W.2d 374, 378 (Mo. banc 1990), the court said: A prolonged friendship by a venireman with a witness for a party, of itself, does not sustain contention that the refusal of the challenge for cause by the trial court was an abuse of discretion — absent a clearly drawn prejudice. | 1 | 1 |
Bentlage v. Springgategreen2 sentences1992Petitioner’s first point states, “The trial court’s refusal to rule on [petitioner’s] constitutional claims may mean that its decision is not a final appealable judgment.” That point does not comport with the requirements of Rule 84.04. “[T]he point is a mere abstract assertion in that it does not state why the actions [or, in this case, the inaction] ... complained about are in error.” Bentlage v. Springgate, 793 S.W.2d 228, 231 (Mo.App.1990). 1992“It preserves nothing for review.” Id. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Owensgreen2 sentences1990"A prolonged friendship by a venireman with a witness for a party, of itself, does not sustain contention that the refusal of the challenge for cause by the trial court was an abuse of discretionabsent a clearly drawn prejudice." State v. Owens, 620 S.W.2d 448, 450 (Mo.App.1981). 1990“A prolonged friendship by a venireman with a witness for a party, of itself, does not sustain contention that the refusal of the challenge for cause by the trial court was an abuse of discretion — absent a clearly drawn prejudice.” State v. Owens, 620 S.W.2d 448, 450 (Mo.App.1981). | 1 | 1 |
Claude T. v. Claire T.green2 sentences1989Hurlock v. Park Lane Medical Center, Inc., 709 S.W.2d at 878 ; Claude T. v. Claire T., 579 S.W.2d 141, 143 (Mo.App.1979). 1989Hurlock v. Park Lane Medical Center, Inc., 709 S.W.2d at 878 ; Claude T. v. Claire T., 579 S.W.2d 141, 143 (Mo.App. 1979). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Waynegreen1 sentence1988State v. McClintic, 731 S.W.2d 853, 857 (Mo.App.1987); State v. Wayne, 706 S.W.2d 298, 299 (Mo.App.1986). | 1 | 1 |
State v. McClinticgreen1 sentence1988State v. McClintic, 731 S.W.2d 853, 857 (Mo.App.1987); State v. Wayne, 706 S.W.2d 298, 299 (Mo.App.1986). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Storygreen1 sentence1987State v. Story, 646 S.W.2d 68, 73 (Mo. banc 1983). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Williamsgreen1 sentence1986The court in Williams, 652 S.W.2d at 112 [21], held that the trial court correctly refused to give a first degree murder instruction and relied on State v. Baker, 636 S.W.2d 902 (Mo. banc 1982) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1183 , 103 S.Ct. 834 , 74 L.Ed.2d 1027 (1983), for its holding. | 1 | 1 |
Tennis v. General Motors Corp.green1 sentence1985Tennis v. General Motors Corp., 625 S.W.2d 218, 233 [22] (Mo.App.1981). | 1 | 1 |
Thummel v. Kinggreen1 sentence1982Thummel v. King, 570 S.W.2d 679, 685 [5] (Mo.banc 1978). | 1 | 1 |
| Wigand v. State Department of Public Health & Welfaregreen | 1 | 1 |
| Middleman v. Complete Auto Transit, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Crook v. Dooleygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Page v. Baxtergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Hood v. Hepplergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Worley Ex Rel. Worley v. Tucker Nevils, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Hundleygreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Gregorygreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Moxleygreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Tritchgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Bowmangreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Richardsongreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Cobbgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Browngreen | 1 | 1 |
| Peterson v. United Railways Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Frost
green
2 sentences2014The State argued that the general rule applied and no prejudice thus existed from the refusal because had the instruction been submitted, “no reasonable basis exist[ed] to believe that the jury would have exercised even greater leniency and convicted her of involuntary manslaughter.” Id. at 218 . 2014The State argued that the general rule applied and no prejudice thus existed from the refusal because had the instruction been submitted, “no reasonable basis exist[ed] to believe that the jury would have exercised even greater leniency and convicted her of involuntary manslaughter.” Id. at 218 . | 2 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Caviness
green
2 sentences1949State v. Caviness, 326 Mo. 992, 998 , 33 S.W.2d 940 , 943; Farmers' State Bank v. Miller, Mo.App., 26 S.W.2d 863 , 864. 1949State v. Caviness, 326 Mo. 992, 998 , 33 S.W.2d 940 , 943; Farmers' State Bank v. Miller, Mo.App., 26 S.W.2d 863 , 864. | 2 | 1949–1949 |
Miles v. Davis
neutral
2 sentences1887Dempsey v. Rein sedler, 22 Mo. App. 43 ; Mills v. Davis, 19 Mo. 408 . 1886Miles v. Davis, 19 Mo. 408 . | 2 | 1886–1887 |
Howard v. McNeill
green
1 sentence2005At the refusal hearing, McNeill “admitted that he was intoxicated at the time of his arrest, but explained the condition was brought about by his consumption of a half pint of whiskey supplied to him by [his friend] after the accident.” Id. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Cypret v. Templeton
green
1 sentence2001Id. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Hurlock v. Park Lane Medical Center, Inc.
green
2 sentences1989Hurlock v. Park Lane Medical Center, Inc., 709 S.W.2d at 878 ; Claude T. v. Claire T., 579 S.W.2d 141, 143 (Mo.App.1979). 1989Hurlock v. Park Lane Medical Center, Inc., 709 S.W.2d at 878 ; Claude T. v. Claire T., 579 S.W.2d 141, 143 (Mo.App. 1979). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
State v. Baker
green
1 sentence1986The court in Williams, 652 S.W.2d at 112 [21], held that the trial court correctly refused to give a first degree murder instruction and relied on State v. Baker, 636 S.W.2d 902 (Mo. banc 1982) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1183 , 103 S.Ct. 834 , 74 L.Ed.2d 1027 (1983), for its holding. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Baker v. Missouri
green
1 sentence1986The court in Williams, 652 S.W.2d at 112 [21], held that the trial court correctly refused to give a first degree murder instruction and relied on State v. Baker, 636 S.W.2d 902 (Mo. banc 1982) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1183 , 103 S.Ct. 834 , 74 L.Ed.2d 1027 (1983), for its holding. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Treasure Isle, Inc. v. United States
green
1 sentence1986The court in Williams, 652 S.W.2d at 112 [21], held that the trial court correctly refused to give a first degree murder instruction and relied on State v. Baker, 636 S.W.2d 902 (Mo. banc 1982) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1183 , 103 S.Ct. 834 , 74 L.Ed.2d 1027 (1983), for its holding. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Metropolitan County Board of Education v. Kelley
green
1 sentence1986The court in Williams, 652 S.W.2d at 112 [21], held that the trial court correctly refused to give a first degree murder instruction and relied on State v. Baker, 636 S.W.2d 902 (Mo. banc 1982) cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1183 , 103 S.Ct. 834 , 74 L.Ed.2d 1027 (1983), for its holding. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Culp v. Rexnord & Booth-Rouse Equipment Co.
green
1 sentence1984Cases from other jurisdictions support that proposition: In Culp v. Rexnard, 553 P.2d 844 (Colo.App.1976), defendant claimed error in the refusal of its instruction that Culp voluntarily and unreasonably proceeded to encounter a known danger in using a concrete mixer. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
State v. McMullin
green
1 sentence1981State v. McMullin, 576 S.W.2d 581 (Mo.App.1979). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Ingle v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad
green
1 sentence1981Co., 608 S.W.2d 76 (Mo.App.1980). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson
red
2 sentences1981In that case, the court applied the test of retroactivity laid down in Chevron Oil Co. v. Hudson, 404 U.S. 97, 106-107 , 92 S.Ct. 349, 355 , 30 L.Ed.2d 296 (1971), and concluded that Liepelt should not be applied to make the refusal of such an instruction error in a case tried before Liepelt and decided, on appeal, subsequent to Liepelt . 1981In that case, the court applied the test of retroactivity laid down in Chevron Oil Co. v. Hudson, 404 U.S. 97, 106-107 , 92 S.Ct. 349, 355 , 30 L.Ed.2d 296 (1971), and concluded that Liepelt should not be applied to make the refusal of such an instruction error in a case tried before Liepelt and decided, on appeal, subsequent to Liepelt . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Williams ex rel. Williams v. Tuttle neutral | 1 | 1977–1977 |
| State v. Benson green | 1 | 1976–1976 |
| People v. Sudduth green | 1 | 1976–1976 |
| Randolph v. Supreme Liberty Life Insurance green | 1 | 1969–1969 |
| Harris v. Quality Dairy Co. green | 1 | 1968–1968 |
| Wegener v. St. Louis County Transit Company green | 1 | 1967–1967 |
| State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. Manzer neutral | 1 | 1965–1965 |
| State v. Markel green | 1 | 1965–1965 |
| State v. Chevlin green | 1 | 1965–1965 |
| State v. McWilliams green | 1 | 1965–1965 |
| Naughton Mulgrew Motor Car Co. v. Westchester Fish Co. neutral | 1 | 1964–1964 |
| Vetter v. Browne green | 1 | 1964–1964 |
| Luckel v. De Vor neutral | 1 | 1964–1964 |
| State v. Long green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| State v. Gadwood green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| State v. Denison green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| Jackson v. Farmers Union Livestock Commission green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| State v. Revard green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| Blivis v. Franklin Investment Co. neutral | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| State v. Rutledge green | 1 | 1962–1962 |
| State v. Henderson green | 1 | 1955–1955 |
| State v. Hendricks green | 1 | 1955–1955 |
| State v. McDonald neutral | 1 | 1955–1955 |
| Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Harriett green | 1 | 1955–1955 |
| Musgrave v. Great Falls Manufacturing Co. neutral | 1 | 1954–1954 |
| Edwards v. Woods. green | 1 | 1954–1954 |
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.