8 Missouri opinions name it 1 courts 1988–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Follmer's Market, Inc. v. Comprehensive Accounting Service Co.green2 sentences1990There is a litigation exception to the statute of limitations, but courts have held the exception is available only “where a person is prevented from exercising his legal remedy by the pendency of legal proceedings.” Follmer’s Market, Inc. v. Comprehensive Accounting Service Company, 608 S.W.2d 457, 460 (Mo.App.1980). 1988Follmer’s Market v. Comprehensive Accounting Service Co., 608 S.W.2d 457, 460 (Mo.App.1980). | 2 | 2 |
Hollida v. Hollidagreen1 sentence2022In Hollida v. Hollida, 190 S.W.3d 550, 556 (Mo. App. S.D. 2006), the Southern District of our court noted that King quoted approvingly of the Restatement (Second) of Judgments as to the general rule against splitting a cause of action. | 1 | 1 |
Scroggins v. MO. DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERVICESgreen1 sentence2009“Statutory exceptions allowing records to be closed are to be strictly construed.” Scroggins v. Missouri Dept. of Social Services, Children’s Division, 227 S.W.3d 498, 500 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Tuft v. City of St. Louis
green
1 sentence2019Henry's argument would permit public governmental bodies to rely on the litigation exception "as a basis for closing virtually any record" in a manner that would "be inconsistent with the requirement that exceptions to the [Sunshine Law] be strictly construed." Tuft, 936 S.W.2d at 118 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Hunter v. State
green
2 sentences2017This includes petitioning for the fonnal recognition of “ownership of a ‘chose in action’ (a litigation claim) formerly belonging to the deceased.” Id. at 745 . 2017Therefore, it follows that “[i]f a person has been declared pursuant to section 473.663 to have an ownership interest in a chose of action as an heir of the'deceased, it would seem logical that the declared owner should be entitled to pursue it and recover it.” Id. (finding that parties- had a right to pursue collection of debt owed to the decedent because they had obtained a judicial • determination of heirship to the property under section 473.663). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Librach v. Cooper
green
1 sentence1997Reporter observes, however, that the court in Librach emphasized that the terms of the agreement between the school board and the superintendent were neither unusual nor atypical. 778 S.W.2d at 355 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Krug v. Sterling Drug, Inc.
green
1 sentence1991In support, they cite Krug v. Sterling Drug, Inc., 416 S.W.2d 143 (Mo.1967). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
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.