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.
6 Missouri opinions name it 1 courts 1992–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Thummel v. Kinggreen2 sentences2012See Thummel v. King, 570 S.W.2d 679, 688 (Mo. banc 1978) (holding it is "fundamental error” in briefing to group numerous incidents of error into “one point or one allegation of error” where the incidents of error do not relate to a single issue). 2000See Thummel v. King, 570 S.W.2d 679, 688 (Mo.banc 1978) (holding it is "fundamental error” in briefing to group numerous incidents of error into a "single point relied on” where the incidents of error do not relate to a single issue). | 5 | 5 |
Hallquist v. Middengreen1 sentence2025Totality of the Circumstances Even under the totality of the circumstances test, Defendants do not owe Plaintiffs a duty to protect them from the negligent incursion of a third party (1) under a foreseeability analysis and (2) because public policy does not support imposing a duty under these facts. “[W]hether a duty exists in a particular case depends on several public policy considerations including ‘the foreseeability of the injury, the likelihood of the injury, the magnitude of the burden of guarding against it and the consequences of placing that burden on defendant.’” Scales, 615 S.W.3d | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Meadows v. Friedman Railroad Salvage Warehouse
green
1 sentence2025Meadows, 655 S.W.2d at 721 ; Faheen, 734 S.W.2d at 273 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Faheen Ex Rel. Hebron v. City Parking Corp.
green
1 sentence2025Meadows, 655 S.W.2d at 721 ; Faheen, 734 S.W.2d at 273 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
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.