6 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1953–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Langlois v. Pemiscot Memorial Hospitalgreen1 sentence2008See Langlois v. Pemiscot Memorial Hospital, 185 S.W.3d 711, 713-14 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
Welker v. MFA Central Co-Operativegreen1 sentence1992Welker v. MFA Central Cooperative 380 S.W.2d 481, 487 (Mo.App. 1964). | 1 | 1 |
Stamps v. Century Electric Co.green1 sentence1953Co., Mo.App., 225 S.W.2d 493, 496 [1-4], and the liberal application of the law does not extend to the authorization of a claim lacking some essential element required by the law. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ria Schumacher v. SC Data Center, Inc.
green
1 sentence2024Id. at 514 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Gudde v. Heiman Grain, Inc.
green
1 sentence1994Gudde, 830 S.W.2d at 576 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Ossery v. Burger-Baird Engraving Co.
green
1 sentence1964Ossery v. Burger-Baird Engraving Co., Mo., 256 S.W.2d 805 . | 1 | 1964–1964 |
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.