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.
10 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1919–2007 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 |
|---|---|---|
Northwestern National Insurance Co. v. Mildenbergergreen2 sentences2007The opinion noted that the expanded benefits to a mortgagee to insurance benefits arising from a union clause went only “up to the amount of the debt secured.” Id. at 383 . 2007Indeed, in Northwestern National Insurance Co. v. Mildenberger, 359 S.W.2d 380, 381-82 (Mo.App.1962), where the sequence of events was the same as the case at bar, the Eastern District of this court said, in no uncertain terms, that the mortgagee’s purchase at foreclosure for the full amount of the balance of the debt plus costs of sale did not preserve a claim for the insurance proceeds, even where the insurance policy contained a union clause. | 1 | 2 |
Carter v. Willert Home Products, Inc.red1 sentence1997See Carter v. Willert Home Products, Inc., 714 S.W.2d 506, 511 (Mo. banc 1986) (holding that in order to overcome qualified immunity, plaintiff has the burden to show actual malice). | 1 | 1 |
Adler v. Laclede Gas Companygreen1 sentence1997However, in our review, “we can neither supply evidence nor ignore evidence binding on [Wright], nor can we use [our standard of review] as a basis for unreasonable, speculative or forced inferences.” Adler v. Laclede Gas Co., 414 S.W.2d 304, 306 (Mo. banc 1967) (citations omitted) (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Wilkerson v. Mid-America Cardiologygreen1 sentence1997See Wilkerson, 908 S.W.2d at 697 (appellate court must affirm where ruling on motion is correct, but basis incorrect). | 1 | 1 |
Tittsworth v. Chaffingreen1 sentence1990Broadcasting, 783 S.W.2d 533, 534 (Mo.App.1990); Tittsworth v. Chaffin, 741 S.W.2d 314, 315 (Mo.App.1987). [15] The "union security" provisions in the "Joint Statement of Intent" recited in the Union's brief or as made a part of affidavits are attached to this opinion as Appendix "A." Respondents concede the accuracy of the provisions in the Union's brief when, in their brief, they say: "A `statement of intent' as was entered into in this case is merely the non-binding, non-enforceable agreement ... between the Union and the City Utilities." (Emphasis added.) [16] Section 105.520, RSMo 1986, p | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Calvary Educational Broadcasting Networkgreen1 sentence1990Broadcasting, 783 S.W.2d 533, 534 (Mo.App.1990); Tittsworth v. Chaffin, 741 S.W.2d 314, 315 (Mo.App.1987). [15] The "union security" provisions in the "Joint Statement of Intent" recited in the Union's brief or as made a part of affidavits are attached to this opinion as Appendix "A." Respondents concede the accuracy of the provisions in the Union's brief when, in their brief, they say: "A `statement of intent' as was entered into in this case is merely the non-binding, non-enforceable agreement ... between the Union and the City Utilities." (Emphasis added.) [16] Section 105.520, RSMo 1986, p | 1 | 1 |
John Claude Bush v. R. M. Muncy Superintendent P.C.C. Attorney General for the State of Marylandgreen1 sentence1989See Bush v. Muncy, 659 F.2d 402, 410 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 910 , 102 S.Ct. 1259 , 71 L.Ed.2d 449 (1982), citing, Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Comm’n v. Colburn, 310 U.S. 419, 429-30 , 60 S.Ct. 1039, 1041-42 , 84 L.Ed. 1287 (1940). | 1 | 1 |
Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission v. Colburngreen2 sentences1989See Bush v. Muncy, 659 F.2d 402, 410 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 910 , 102 S.Ct. 1259 , 71 L.Ed.2d 449 (1982), citing, Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Comm’n v. Colburn, 310 U.S. 419, 429-30 , 60 S.Ct. 1039, 1041-42 , 84 L.Ed. 1287 (1940). 1989See Bush v. Muncy, 659 F.2d 402, 410 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 910 , 102 S.Ct. 1259 , 71 L.Ed.2d 449 (1982), citing, Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Comm’n v. Colburn, 310 U.S. 419, 429-30 , 60 S.Ct. 1039, 1041-42 , 84 L.Ed. 1287 (1940). | 1 | 1 |
Bush v. Muncygreen2 sentences1989See Bush v. Muncy, 659 F.2d 402, 410 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 910 , 102 S.Ct. 1259 , 71 L.Ed.2d 449 (1982), citing, Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Comm’n v. Colburn, 310 U.S. 419, 429-30 , 60 S.Ct. 1039, 1041-42 , 84 L.Ed. 1287 (1940). 1989See Bush v. Muncy, 659 F.2d 402, 410 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 910 , 102 S.Ct. 1259 , 71 L.Ed.2d 449 (1982), citing, Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Comm’n v. Colburn, 310 U.S. 419, 429-30 , 60 S.Ct. 1039, 1041-42 , 84 L.Ed. 1287 (1940). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Swihart v. Mo. Farmers Mut. T., C. W. Ins. Co.
green
2 sentences2007Quoting from Swi-hart v. Missouri Farwiers Mutual Toma-do, Cyclone & Windstorm Insurance .Co., 234 Mo.App. 998 , 138 S.W.2d 9 (1940), the court stated that a union contract was an independent contract for the benefit of the mortgagee for the limited purpose of keeping the mortgagor from defeating the rights of the mortgagee vis-a-vis the insurance company. 2007Quoting from Swi-hart v. Missouri Farwiers Mutual Toma-do, Cyclone & Windstorm Insurance .Co., 234 Mo.App. 998 , 138 S.W.2d 9 (1940), the court stated that a union contract was an independent contract for the benefit of the mortgagee for the limited purpose of keeping the mortgagor from defeating the rights of the mortgagee vis-a-vis the insurance company. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Weekly v. Missouri Property Insurance Placement Facility
green
1 sentence1998Weekly, 538 S.W.2d at 379 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Western Fire Insurance Co.
green
1 sentence1998Id. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Charter Bank of Boonville v. Shelter General Insurance
green
1 sentence1995Id. at 46 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Cuyler v. Adams
green
2 sentences1989The law of the union doctrine provides that “where Congress has authorized the States to enter into a cooperative agreement, and where the subject matter of that agreement is an appropriate subject for congressional legislation, the consent of Congress transforms the States’ agreement into federal law under the Compact Clause.” Cuyler v. Adams, 449 U.S. 433, 440 , 101 S.Ct. 703, 708 , 66 L.Ed.2d 641 (1981). 1989The law of the union doctrine provides that “where Congress has authorized the States to enter into a cooperative agreement, and where the subject matter of that agreement is an appropriate subject for congressional legislation, the consent of Congress transforms the States’ agreement into federal law under the Compact Clause.” Cuyler v. Adams, 449 U.S. 433, 440 , 101 S.Ct. 703, 708 , 66 L.Ed.2d 641 (1981). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Trust Co. of St. Louis County v. Phoenix Insurance
green
1 sentence1927Louis Court of Appeals in Trust Co. v. Insurance Co., 201 Mo. App. 223 . | 1 | 1927–1927 |
In Re Thomas
green
1 sentence1925It may not concern us here, except in an academic way, to discuss the former and present the rule and *406 practice in the English courts in regard to hail, because in most, if not all, of our states of the Union the rule of the common law, as recently pointed out in a well-considered Oklahoma case, In re Thomas, 20 Olda. 167, 93 Pac. 980 , has been modified in all except capital offenses by constitutional enactments providing, as ill the pithy words of our own Constitution, that such offenses shall not be bailable where the proof is evident or the presumption great. | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Marcus v. Rhode Island Insurance
neutral
2 sentences1919Co., 187 Mo. App. 134 , 173 S. W. 30 .] The mortgage clause ’ in each of the cases before us are the usual union or standard mortgage clauses and are attached to the policies in question, and thereby constitute a new and independent contract of insurance between the insurance company and The Trust Company of St. 1919Co., 187 Mo. App. 134 , 173 S. W. 30 .] The mortgage clause ’ in each of the cases before us are the usual union or standard mortgage clauses and are attached to the policies in question, and thereby constitute a new and independent contract of insurance between the insurance company and The Trust Company of St. | 1 | 1919–1919 |
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.