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.
8 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1907–1971 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 |
|---|---|---|
Franklin v. Franklingreen2 sentences1971But it would not have followed necessarily and as a matter of course that plaintiff was entitled to a decree of divorce, for the burden unquestionably rested on him to show by a preponderance of the credible evidence that he was not only an injured but also an innocent party [Simon v. Simon, Mo., 248 S.W.2d 560, 562 (1); O’Leary v. O’Leary, Mo.App., 385 S.W.2d 346, 351 (3); L- v. N-, Mo. App., 326 S.W.2d 751, 754 , and cases collected in note 3], this requirement being “neither more nor less than an application of the equitable doctrine of ‘clean hands’ to a divorce action.” Franklin v. Frankl 1969It was held in Franklin v. Franklin, 365 Mo. 442 , 283 S.W.2d 483 , 486 that making proof of innocence an affirmative burden of the plaintiff [here it would be the defendant] was neither more nor less than an application of the equitable doctrine of “clean hands” to a divorce action. | 1 | 3 |
O'Leary v. O'Learygreen1 sentence1971But it would not have followed necessarily and as a matter of course that plaintiff was entitled to a decree of divorce, for the burden unquestionably rested on him to show by a preponderance of the credible evidence that he was not only an injured but also an innocent party [Simon v. Simon, Mo., 248 S.W.2d 560, 562 (1); O’Leary v. O’Leary, Mo.App., 385 S.W.2d 346, 351 (3); L- v. N-, Mo. App., 326 S.W.2d 751, 754 , and cases collected in note 3], this requirement being “neither more nor less than an application of the equitable doctrine of ‘clean hands’ to a divorce action.” Franklin v. Frankl | 1 | 1 |
Simon v. Simongreen1 sentence1971But it would not have followed necessarily and as a matter of course that plaintiff was entitled to a decree of divorce, for the burden unquestionably rested on him to show by a preponderance of the credible evidence that he was not only an injured but also an innocent party [Simon v. Simon, Mo., 248 S.W.2d 560, 562 (1); O’Leary v. O’Leary, Mo.App., 385 S.W.2d 346, 351 (3); L- v. N-, Mo. App., 326 S.W.2d 751, 754 , and cases collected in note 3], this requirement being “neither more nor less than an application of the equitable doctrine of ‘clean hands’ to a divorce action.” Franklin v. Frankl | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz
green
2 sentences1941The facts set out therein are such as clearly invoke the application of the equitable principle which appellant advances here but under the facts of the instant case, and in so far as the equities are concerned, the equity of the Powell Company in the funds paid to it out' of the- payment to the contractor on the contract was superior to that of the surety. [Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Federal Construction Co., 168 Minn. 202 , 209 N. W. 911 ; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz, 145 Minn. 438 , 177 N. W. 664 ; Ganley v. City of Pipestone, 154 Minn. 193 , 191 N. W. 738 .]” The responde 1941The facts set out therein are such as clearly invoke the application of the equitable principle which appellant advances here but under the facts of the instant case, and in so far as the equities are concerned, the equity of the Powell Company in the funds paid to it out' of the- payment to the contractor on the contract was superior to that of the surety. [Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Federal Construction Co., 168 Minn. 202 , 209 N. W. 911 ; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz, 145 Minn. 438 , 177 N. W. 664 ; Ganley v. City of Pipestone, 154 Minn. 193 , 191 N. W. 738 .]” The responde | 2 | 1937–1941 |
Ganley v. City of Pipestone
green
2 sentences1941The facts set out therein are such as clearly invoke the application of the equitable principle which appellant advances here but under the facts of the instant case, and in so far as the equities are concerned, the equity of the Powell Company in the funds paid to it out' of the- payment to the contractor on the contract was superior to that of the surety. [Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Federal Construction Co., 168 Minn. 202 , 209 N. W. 911 ; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz, 145 Minn. 438 , 177 N. W. 664 ; Ganley v. City of Pipestone, 154 Minn. 193 , 191 N. W. 738 .]” The responde 1941The facts set out therein are such as clearly invoke the application of the equitable principle which appellant advances here but under the facts of the instant case, and in so far as the equities are concerned, the equity of the Powell Company in the funds paid to it out' of the- payment to the contractor on the contract was superior to that of the surety. [Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Federal Construction Co., 168 Minn. 202 , 209 N. W. 911 ; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz, 145 Minn. 438 , 177 N. W. 664 ; Ganley v. City of Pipestone, 154 Minn. 193 , 191 N. W. 738 .]” The responde | 2 | 1937–1941 |
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Federal Construction Co.
green
2 sentences1941The facts set out therein are such as clearly invoke the application of the equitable principle which appellant advances here but under the facts of the instant case, and in so far as the equities are concerned, the equity of the Powell Company in the funds paid to it out' of the- payment to the contractor on the contract was superior to that of the surety. [Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Federal Construction Co., 168 Minn. 202 , 209 N. W. 911 ; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz, 145 Minn. 438 , 177 N. W. 664 ; Ganley v. City of Pipestone, 154 Minn. 193 , 191 N. W. 738 .]” The responde 1941The facts set out therein are such as clearly invoke the application of the equitable principle which appellant advances here but under the facts of the instant case, and in so far as the equities are concerned, the equity of the Powell Company in the funds paid to it out' of the- payment to the contractor on the contract was superior to that of the surety. [Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Federal Construction Co., 168 Minn. 202 , 209 N. W. 911 ; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Wurtz, 145 Minn. 438 , 177 N. W. 664 ; Ganley v. City of Pipestone, 154 Minn. 193 , 191 N. W. 738 .]” The responde | 2 | 1937–1941 |
Day v. Day
green
1 sentence1971But it would not have followed necessarily and as a matter of course that plaintiff was entitled to a decree of divorce, for the burden unquestionably rested on him to show by a preponderance of the credible evidence that he was not only an injured but also an innocent party [Simon v. Simon, Mo., 248 S.W.2d 560, 562 (1); O’Leary v. O’Leary, Mo.App., 385 S.W.2d 346, 351 (3); L- v. N-, Mo. App., 326 S.W.2d 751, 754 , and cases collected in note 3], this requirement being “neither more nor less than an application of the equitable doctrine of ‘clean hands’ to a divorce action.” Franklin v. Frankl | 1 | 1971–1971 |
L v. N
green
1 sentence1971But it would not have followed necessarily and as a matter of course that plaintiff was entitled to a decree of divorce, for the burden unquestionably rested on him to show by a preponderance of the credible evidence that he was not only an injured but also an innocent party [Simon v. Simon, Mo., 248 S.W.2d 560, 562 (1); O’Leary v. O’Leary, Mo.App., 385 S.W.2d 346, 351 (3); L- v. N-, Mo. App., 326 S.W.2d 751, 754 , and cases collected in note 3], this requirement being “neither more nor less than an application of the equitable doctrine of ‘clean hands’ to a divorce action.” Franklin v. Frankl | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Cherry v. Cherry
green
2 sentences1968Cherry v. Cherry, 225 Mo.App. 998 , 35 S.W.2d 659, 661 ; Glenn v. Glenn, Mo.App., 192 S.W.2d 629 . 1968Cherry v. Cherry, 225 Mo.App. 998 , 35 S.W.2d 659, 661 ; Glenn v. Glenn, Mo.App., 192 S.W.2d 629 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Ruckels v. Pryor
green
1 sentence1954Ruckels v. Pryor, 351 Mo. 819 , 174 S. W. (2) 185; Larson v. Crescent Planing Mill Co., (Mo. App.) 218 S. W. (2) 814. | 1 | 1954–1954 |
Francisco v. Wingfield
neutral
2 sentences1907The will before us cannot be distinguished from the one construed to work a conversion of realty into personalty in Francisco v. Wingfield, 161 Mo. 542, 560 , 61 S. W. 842 . [See, too, 3 Pomeroy, Eq. 1907The will before us cannot be distinguished from the one construed to work a conversion of realty into personalty in Francisco v. Wingfield, 161 Mo. 542, 560 , 61 S. W. 842 . [See, too, 3 Pomeroy, Eq. | 1 | 1907–1907 |
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.