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 1941–2024 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wallingsford v. City of Maplewoodgreen1 sentence2024“Missouri law recognizes that a claim for constructive discharge constitutes actionable discrimination under the [Missouri Human Rights Act].” Wallingsford v. City of Maplewood, 287 S.W.3d 682, 685 (Mo. 2009). | 1 | 1 |
Hamm v. Crawfordgreen1 sentence2022See Hammerschmidt v. Hardman, 534 S.W.3d 918, 919 (Mo. App. W.D. 2017) (“If the notice of appeal is untimely, the appellate court is without jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed.”); Hamm v. Crawford, 281 S.W.3d 923, 923 (Mo. App. E.D. 2009) (“If a timely notice of appeal has not been filed, this Court is without jurisdiction to review the appeal and it must be dismissed.”). | 1 | 1 |
Senzee v. Director of Revenuegreen1 sentence2022See Hammerschmidt v. Hardman, 534 S.W.3d 918, 919 (Mo. App. W.D. 2017) (“If the notice of appeal is untimely, the appellate court is without jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed.”); Hamm v. Crawford, 281 S.W.3d 923, 923 (Mo. App. E.D. 2009) (“If a timely notice of appeal has not been filed, this Court is without jurisdiction to review the appeal and it must be dismissed.”). | 1 | 1 |
Krasney v. Curators of the University of Missourigreen2 sentences2021That is because "the Board of Curators of the University of Missouri is invested by constitutional mandate as a public entity with the status of a governmental body." Krasney v. Curators of Univ. of Mo., 765 S.W.2d 646, 649 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989) (emphasis added); see also Article IX, section 9(a) ("The government of the state university shall be vested in a board of curators consisting of nine members appointed by the governor, by and with the advice and consent of the senate."); Mo. Rev. 2021That is because "the Board of Curators of the University of Missouri is invested by constitutional mandate as a public entity with the status of a governmental body." Krasney v. Curators of Univ. of Mo., 765 S.W.2d 646, 649 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989) (emphasis added); see also Article IX, section 9(a) ("The government of the state university shall be vested in a board of curators consisting of nine members appointed by the governor, by and with the advice and consent of the senate."); Mo. Rev. | 1 | 1 |
Eaton v. Mallinckrodt, Inc.green1 sentence2017This appeal by Suppes followed. 2 Standard of Review “The question presented by a motion for judgment on the pleadings is whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the face of the pleadings.” Eaton v. Mallinckrodt, Inc., 224 S.W.3d 596, 599 (Mo. banc 2007). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Goss v. Lopez
green
1 sentence2010Id. at 164 With these principles in mind, we turn to Korte’s overarching allegation in his first point that the University failed “to abide by its own rules and regulations governing a disciplinary dismissal” when expelling Korte from the University and this violation deprived him of constitutionally protected interests. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Barile v. University of Virginia
green
1 sentence1998The Ohio Court of Appeals reversed, finding sufficient minimum contacts between the University and Ohio to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction. 441 N.E.2d at 614 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Kansas City Exposition Driving Park v. Kansas City
green
2 sentences1941While we find the University’s plea of res judicata is upheld by the decisions in Kansas City Exposition Driving Park v. Kansas City, 174 Mo. 425 , 74 S. W. 979 , and North St. 1941While we find the University’s plea of res judicata is upheld by the decisions in Kansas City Exposition Driving Park v. Kansas City, 174 Mo. 425 , 74 S. W. 979 , and North St. | 1 | 1941–1941 |
North St. Louis Gymnastic Society v. Hagerman
neutral
1 sentence1941Louis Gymnastic Society v. James Hagerman, Jr., 232 Mo. 693 , 135 S. W. 425 we!cannot-pass upon it because it is not before us. | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Johnson v. Westerfield's Admr.
neutral
1 sentence1941Louis Gymnastic Society v. James Hagerman, Jr., 232 Mo. 693 , 135 S. W. 425 we!cannot-pass upon it because it is not before us. | 1 | 1941–1941 |
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.