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.
7 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1923–1984 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 |
|---|---|---|
Maier v. Brockgreen2 sentences1984Maier v. Brock, 222 Mo. 74 , 120 S.W. 1167, 1170 (1909). 3 However we conclude that defendant’s admission that his second marriage was invalid was sufficient to overcome the presumption of its validity. 1984Maier v. Brock, 222 Mo. 74 , 120 S.W. 1167, 1170 (1909). 3 However we conclude that defendant’s admission that his second marriage was invalid was sufficient to overcome the presumption of its validity. | 1 | 1 |
Morrow v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.green1 sentence1932But this is merely a general statement of the rule and is not inconsistent with the holdings that, in some instances, the injured party may recover expenses incurred in relying upon the contract, although such expenses would have been incurred had the contract not been breached. [See Morrow v. Railroad, 140 Mo. App. 200, 212, 213 ; Bryant v. Barton, 32 Neb. 613, 616 ; Woodbury v. Jones, 44 N. H. 206; Driggs v. Dwight, 31 Am. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lyle v. Local No. 452, Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butchers Workmen
green
2 sentences1939A general statement of this rule is set out in 32 C.J. 155, paragraph 209, as follows: "Since the right to carry on a lawful business without obstruction is a property right, acts committed without just cause or excuse, which interfere with the carrying on of complainant's business and destroy his custom, his credit, or his profits, do an irreparable injury and authorize the issuance of an injunction." This rule was applied in the case of Lyle v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butchers, Local No. 452 (Tenn.), 124 S.W.2d 701 , decided February 18, 1939. 1939J. 155, paragraph 209, as follows: “Since the right to carry on a lawfful business without obstruction is a property right, acts committed without just cause or excuse, which interfere with the carrying on of complainant’s business and destroy his custom, his credit, or his profits, do an irreparable injury and authorize the issuance of an injunction. ” • This rule was applied in the case of Lyle v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butchers, Local No. 452 (Tenn.), 124 S. W. (2d) 701 , decided February 18, 1939. | 2 | 1939–1939 |
Yarborough v. Yarborough
green
2 sentences1980Yarborough v. Yarborough, 290 U.S. 202 , 54 S.Ct. 181 , 78 L.Ed. 269 (1933), the first cited case, arose when a child resident in South Carolina sued her father, living in Georgia, for support. 1980Yarborough v. Yarborough, 290 U.S. 202 , 54 S.Ct. 181 , 78 L.Ed. 269 (1933), the first cited case, arose when a child resident in South Carolina sued her father, living in Georgia, for support. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Sperry & Hutchinson Co. v. O'Neill-Adams Co.
green
1 sentence1932Dec. 283 .] In Sperry et al. v. O’Neill-Adams Co., 185 Fed. 231 , the court held that the advantages resulting from the use of trading stamps as a means of increasing trade are so contingent that they cannot form a basis on which to rest a recovery for a breach of contract to supply them. | 1 | 1932–1932 |
Bryant v. Barton
neutral
1 sentence1932But this is merely a general statement of the rule and is not inconsistent with the holdings that, in some instances, the injured party may recover expenses incurred in relying upon the contract, although such expenses would have been incurred had the contract not been breached. [See Morrow v. Railroad, 140 Mo. App. 200, 212, 213 ; Bryant v. Barton, 32 Neb. 613, 616 ; Woodbury v. Jones, 44 N. H. 206; Driggs v. Dwight, 31 Am. | 1 | 1932–1932 |
DeFord v. New York Life Insurance
green
1 sentence1931DeFord v. Insurance Co.. 75 Colo. 146 . | 1 | 1931–1931 |
Winslow Bros. v. McCully Stone Mason Co.
green
1 sentence1923Co. v. McCully Stone Mason Co., 169 Mo. 236 ; Weis & Jennett Marble Co. v. Gardiner, 198 Mo. App. 35 and cases, p. 39.], In the Win-slow Case the limitations here sought to be applied to the statute (now Sec. 7216, R. | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Weis & Jennett Marble Co. v. Gardiner
green
1 sentence1923Co. v. McCully Stone Mason Co., 169 Mo. 236 ; Weis & Jennett Marble Co. v. Gardiner, 198 Mo. App. 35 and cases, p. 39.], In the Win-slow Case the limitations here sought to be applied to the statute (now Sec. 7216, R. | 1 | 1923–1923 |
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.