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 1911–2012 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 |
|---|---|---|
Coalition for the Environment v. John A. Volpe, Coalition for the Environment v. Linclay Development Corporationgreen2 sentences1975This concept was restated in Coalition for the Environment v. Volpe, 504 F.2d 156, 165 (8th Cir. 1974), noting a dual test of whether the challenged action will cause plaintiffs injury in fact, and whether the injury is within the “zone of interests” created by statutes which plaintiffs contended were being violated, suggesting the need for a causal relationship between the action challenged and the injury complained of. 1975This concept was restated in Coalition for the Environment v. Volpe, 504 F.2d 156, 165 (8th Cir. 1974), noting a dual test of whether the challenged action will cause plaintiffs injury in fact, and whether the injury is within the "zone of interests" created by statutes which plaintiffs contended were being violated, suggesting the need for a causal relationship between the action challenged and the injury complained of. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kirkpatrick v. Preisler
green
2 sentences2012In Kirkpatrick v. Preisler, the Supreme Court recognized an exception to the consideration of county or municipal boundaries in a challenge to the population equality of congressional districts under the United States Constitution, stating that it is improper to justify deviations based on political subdivision boundaries. 394 U.S. 526, 533-34 , 89 S.Ct. 1225 , 22 L.Ed.2d 519 (1969). 2012In Kirkpatrick v. Preisler, the Supreme Court recognized an exception to the consideration of county or municipal boundaries in a challenge to the population equality of congressional districts under the United States Constitution, stating that it is improper to justify deviations based on political subdivision boundaries. 394 U.S. 526, 533-34 , 89 S.Ct. 1225 , 22 L.Ed.2d 519 (1969). | 2 | 2012–2012 |
Houston v. Lack
green
2 sentences2002Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 , 108 S.Ct. 2379 , 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988) (applying the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1), the Supreme Court recognized a rule that allows motions to be deemed received when mailed due to the circumstances of prisoners and also due to the procedural safeguards available in federal prisons). 3 . 2002Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 , 108 S.Ct. 2379 , 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988) (applying the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1), the Supreme Court recognized a rule that allows motions to be deemed received when mailed due to the circumstances of prisoners and also due to the procedural safeguards available in federal prisons). 3 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Cowans v. State
green
1 sentence2002The law in Missouri is that a motion is received when it is filed with the exception of Cowans v. State, 778 S.W.2d 758 (Mo.App. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Madden v. C & K Barbecue Carryout, Inc.
green
2 sentences1992In the consolidated cases of Madden v. C & K Barbecue Carryout, Inc., 758 S.W.2d 59 (Mo. banc 1988), and Decker v. Gramex Corp., 758 S.W.2d 59 (Mo. banc 1988), the supreme court recognized the rule in Brown I, reversing a dismissal in Madden and a summary judgment ruling in Decker . 1992In the consolidated cases of Madden v. C & K Barbecue Carryout, Inc., 758 S.W.2d 59 (Mo. banc 1988), and Decker v. Gramex Corp., 758 S.W.2d 59 (Mo. banc 1988), the supreme court recognized the rule in Brown I, reversing a dismissal in Madden and a summary judgment ruling in Decker . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Breeding v. Dodson Trailer Repair, Inc.
green
1 sentence1988In Breeding v. Dodson Trailer Repair, Inc., 679 S.W.2d 281 (Mo. banc 1984) [2], the Supreme Court recognized the principle that statements made to a physician, or contained in hospital records, even if characterized as medical history, are admissible insofar as such statements are reasonably pertinent to diagnosis and treatment. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Cole v. St. Louis Transit Co.
green
2 sentences1911But of late years, the court has adopted the rule that the servant never assumes the risk of the master’s neg ligence, and assumes only the risks incident to the employment. [Curtis v. McNair, 173 Mo. 270 , 73 S. W. 167 ; Cole v. Transit Co., 183 Mo. 81 , 81 S. W. 1138 ; Jewell v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co., 231 Mo. 176 , 132 S. W. 703 .] And now the right of a servant to recover, notwithstanding he knew of the defect in the instrument and continued to use it, is to be determined under the rules applicable to contributory negligence. 1911But of late years, the court has adopted the rule that the servant never assumes the risk of the master’s neg ligence, and assumes only the risks incident to the employment. [Curtis v. McNair, 173 Mo. 270 , 73 S. W. 167 ; Cole v. Transit Co., 183 Mo. 81 , 81 S. W. 1138 ; Jewell v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co., 231 Mo. 176 , 132 S. W. 703 .] And now the right of a servant to recover, notwithstanding he knew of the defect in the instrument and continued to use it, is to be determined under the rules applicable to contributory negligence. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Curtis v. McNair
green
2 sentences1911But of late years, the court has adopted the rule that the servant never assumes the risk of the master’s neg ligence, and assumes only the risks incident to the employment. [Curtis v. McNair, 173 Mo. 270 , 73 S. W. 167 ; Cole v. Transit Co., 183 Mo. 81 , 81 S. W. 1138 ; Jewell v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co., 231 Mo. 176 , 132 S. W. 703 .] And now the right of a servant to recover, notwithstanding he knew of the defect in the instrument and continued to use it, is to be determined under the rules applicable to contributory negligence. 1911But of late years, the court has adopted the rule that the servant never assumes the risk of the master’s neg ligence, and assumes only the risks incident to the employment. [Curtis v. McNair, 173 Mo. 270 , 73 S. W. 167 ; Cole v. Transit Co., 183 Mo. 81 , 81 S. W. 1138 ; Jewell v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co., 231 Mo. 176 , 132 S. W. 703 .] And now the right of a servant to recover, notwithstanding he knew of the defect in the instrument and continued to use it, is to be determined under the rules applicable to contributory negligence. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Jewell v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co.
green
2 sentences1911But of late years, the court has adopted the rule that the servant never assumes the risk of the master’s neg ligence, and assumes only the risks incident to the employment. [Curtis v. McNair, 173 Mo. 270 , 73 S. W. 167 ; Cole v. Transit Co., 183 Mo. 81 , 81 S. W. 1138 ; Jewell v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co., 231 Mo. 176 , 132 S. W. 703 .] And now the right of a servant to recover, notwithstanding he knew of the defect in the instrument and continued to use it, is to be determined under the rules applicable to contributory negligence. 1911But of late years, the court has adopted the rule that the servant never assumes the risk of the master’s neg ligence, and assumes only the risks incident to the employment. [Curtis v. McNair, 173 Mo. 270 , 73 S. W. 167 ; Cole v. Transit Co., 183 Mo. 81 , 81 S. W. 1138 ; Jewell v. Kansas City Bolt & Nut Co., 231 Mo. 176 , 132 S. W. 703 .] And now the right of a servant to recover, notwithstanding he knew of the defect in the instrument and continued to use it, is to be determined under the rules applicable to contributory negligence. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
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.