strength of his own claim (Missouri) · Go Syfert
← Missouri issues

strength of his own claim in Missouri

6 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1903–2009 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Olson v. Penrodgreen
moctapp · 1973 · cited in 3 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 1980–2009
2 sentences

2009Additionally, “ ‘a plaintiffs right of recovery depends upon the strength of his own claim, and not on the weakness of the defendant’s.’ ” Id. (quoting Olson v. Pe-rod, 493 S.W.2d 673, 676 (Mo.App.1973)). “[D]amages may be allowed in a replevin suit if demanded by the successful party in his petition.” State v. American Surety Co., 74 S.W.2d 1094, 1095 (Mo.App.1934).

1997Additionally, “a plaintiff’s right of recovery depends upon the strength of his own claim, and not on the weakness of the defendant[’]s.” Olson v. Penrod, 493 S.W.2d 673, 676 (Mo.App.1973).

33
State Rel. Stevenson v. American Suretygreen
· 1934 · cited in 1 Missouri opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009Additionally, “ ‘a plaintiffs right of recovery depends upon the strength of his own claim, and not on the weakness of the defendant’s.’ ” Id. (quoting Olson v. Pe-rod, 493 S.W.2d 673, 676 (Mo.App.1973)). “[D]amages may be allowed in a replevin suit if demanded by the successful party in his petition.” State v. American Surety Co., 74 S.W.2d 1094, 1095 (Mo.App.1934).

2009“But even in a replevin suit, where the court and jury fail to assess damages, a suit may be maintained on the bond for damages.” Id.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
Green Hills Production Credit Ass'n v. R & M Porter Farms, Inc. green
moctapp · 1986
1 sentence

2009Additionally, “ ‘a plaintiffs right of recovery depends upon the strength of his own claim, and not on the weakness of the defendant’s.’ ” Id. (quoting Olson v. Pe-rod, 493 S.W.2d 673, 676 (Mo.App.1973)). “[D]amages may be allowed in a replevin suit if demanded by the successful party in his petition.” State v. American Surety Co., 74 S.W.2d 1094, 1095 (Mo.App.1934).

12009–2009
Pearl v. Interstate Securities Co. green
· 1947
2 sentences

1963Pearl v. Interstate Securities Co., 357 Mo. 160 , 206 S.W.2d 975 ; Foulke v. McIntosh, Mo.App., 214 S.W.2d 735 ; Bordman Investment Co. v. Peoples Bank of Kansas City, Mo.App., 320 S.W.2d 72 .

1963Pearl v. Interstate Securities Co., 357 Mo. 160 , 206 S.W.2d 975 ; Foulke v. McIntosh, Mo.App., 214 S.W.2d 735 ; Bordman Investment Co. v. Peoples Bank of Kansas City, Mo.App., 320 S.W.2d 72 .

11963–1963
Bordman Investment Co. v. Peoples Bank of Kansas City green
moctapp · 1958
1 sentence

1963Pearl v. Interstate Securities Co., 357 Mo. 160 , 206 S.W.2d 975 ; Foulke v. McIntosh, Mo.App., 214 S.W.2d 735 ; Bordman Investment Co. v. Peoples Bank of Kansas City, Mo.App., 320 S.W.2d 72 .

11963–1963
Little v. St. Louis Union Trust Co. neutral
mo · 1906
2 sentences

1934Louis Union Trust Co., 197 Mo. 281 , 291, 94 S.W. 890 .] Each claimant was required to and did by way of interplea assert his claim to the fund, occupying the position of a plaintiff with the burden on each to support his claim or have his interplea dismissed. [33 C.J. 459; Commonwealth Trust Co. v. Du Mortimer, 193 Mo. App. 290 , 299, 183 S.W. 1137 .] In such situation each claimant must stand on the strength of his own claim rather than on the weakness of a rival claim. [3] We are mindful, of course, as contended by relators, that in this present proceeding our province is solely to determin

1934Louis Union Trust Co., 197 Mo. 281 , 291, 94 S.W. 890 .] Each claimant was required to and did by way of interplea assert his claim to the fund, occupying the position of a plaintiff with the burden on each to support his claim or have his interplea dismissed. [33 C.J. 459; Commonwealth Trust Co. v. Du Mortimer, 193 Mo. App. 290 , 299, 183 S.W. 1137 .] In such situation each claimant must stand on the strength of his own claim rather than on the weakness of a rival claim. [3] We are mindful, of course, as contended by relators, that in this present proceeding our province is solely to determin

11934–1934
State Ex Rel. Brotherhood of American Yeoman v. Reynolds green
mo · 1921
2 sentences

1934VI, Amendment of 1884, Sec. 6, Constitution of Missouri; State ex rel. v. Haid, 323 Mo. 9 , 18 S.W.2d 478 , 480; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 287 Mo. 169 , 174, 229 S.W. 1057 ; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 289 Mo. 506 , 514, 233 S.W. 483 .] And in determining that question this court will take as true and consider only the facts as found and stated by the Court of Appeals. [State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 43 S.W.2d 1054 , 1057; State ex rel. v. Trimble, 323 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W.2d 46 , 51.] We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact that the case in the Court of Appeals in which was rendered the opin

1934VI, Amendment of 1884, Sec. 6, Constitution of Missouri; State ex rel. v. Haid, 323 Mo. 9 , 18 S.W.2d 478 , 480; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 287 Mo. 169 , 174, 229 S.W. 1057 ; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 289 Mo. 506 , 514, 233 S.W. 483 .] And in determining that question this court will take as true and consider only the facts as found and stated by the Court of Appeals. [State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 43 S.W.2d 1054 , 1057; State ex rel. v. Trimble, 323 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W.2d 46 , 51.] We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact that the case in the Court of Appeals in which was rendered the opin

11934–1934
State Ex Rel. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. v. Haid green
mo · 1929
2 sentences

1934VI, Amendment of 1884, Sec. 6, Constitution of Missouri; State ex rel. v. Haid, 323 Mo. 9 , 18 S.W.2d 478 , 480; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 287 Mo. 169 , 174, 229 S.W. 1057 ; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 289 Mo. 506 , 514, 233 S.W. 483 .] And in determining that question this court will take as true and consider only the facts as found and stated by the Court of Appeals. [State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 43 S.W.2d 1054 , 1057; State ex rel. v. Trimble, 323 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W.2d 46 , 51.] We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact that the case in the Court of Appeals in which was rendered the opin

1934VI, Amendment of 1884, Sec. 6, Constitution of Missouri; State ex rel. v. Haid, 323 Mo. 9 , 18 S.W.2d 478 , 480; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 287 Mo. 169 , 174, 229 S.W. 1057 ; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 289 Mo. 506 , 514, 233 S.W. 483 .] And in determining that question this court will take as true and consider only the facts as found and stated by the Court of Appeals. [State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 43 S.W.2d 1054 , 1057; State ex rel. v. Trimble, 323 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W.2d 46 , 51.] We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact that the case in the Court of Appeals in which was rendered the opin

11934–1934
State Ex Rel. Calhoun v. Reynolds green
· 1921
2 sentences

1934VI, Amendment of 1884, Sec. 6, Constitution of Missouri; State ex rel. v. Haid, 323 Mo. 9 , 18 S.W.2d 478 , 480; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 287 Mo. 169 , 174, 229 S.W. 1057 ; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 289 Mo. 506 , 514, 233 S.W. 483 .] And in determining that question this court will take as true and consider only the facts as found and stated by the Court of Appeals. [State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 43 S.W.2d 1054 , 1057; State ex rel. v. Trimble, 323 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W.2d 46 , 51.] We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact that the case in the Court of Appeals in which was rendered the opin

1934VI, Amendment of 1884, Sec. 6, Constitution of Missouri; State ex rel. v. Haid, 323 Mo. 9 , 18 S.W.2d 478 , 480; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 287 Mo. 169 , 174, 229 S.W. 1057 ; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 289 Mo. 506 , 514, 233 S.W. 483 .] And in determining that question this court will take as true and consider only the facts as found and stated by the Court of Appeals. [State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 43 S.W.2d 1054 , 1057; State ex rel. v. Trimble, 323 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W.2d 46 , 51.] We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact that the case in the Court of Appeals in which was rendered the opin

11934–1934
State Ex Rel. Northwestern National Insurance v. Trimble green
mo · 1929
2 sentences

1934VI, Amendment of 1884, Sec. 6, Constitution of Missouri; State ex rel. v. Haid, 323 Mo. 9 , 18 S.W.2d 478 , 480; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 287 Mo. 169 , 174, 229 S.W. 1057 ; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 289 Mo. 506 , 514, 233 S.W. 483 .] And in determining that question this court will take as true and consider only the facts as found and stated by the Court of Appeals. [State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 43 S.W.2d 1054 , 1057; State ex rel. v. Trimble, 323 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W.2d 46 , 51.] We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact that the case in the Court of Appeals in which was rendered the opin

1934VI, Amendment of 1884, Sec. 6, Constitution of Missouri; State ex rel. v. Haid, 323 Mo. 9 , 18 S.W.2d 478 , 480; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 287 Mo. 169 , 174, 229 S.W. 1057 ; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 289 Mo. 506 , 514, 233 S.W. 483 .] And in determining that question this court will take as true and consider only the facts as found and stated by the Court of Appeals. [State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 43 S.W.2d 1054 , 1057; State ex rel. v. Trimble, 323 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W.2d 46 , 51.] We cannot, however, shut our eyes to the fact that the case in the Court of Appeals in which was rendered the opin

11934–1934
Commonwealth Trust Co. v. DuMontimer green
· 1916
2 sentences

1934Louis Union Trust Co., 197 Mo. 281 , 291, 94 S.W. 890 .] Each claimant was required to and did by way of interplea assert his claim to the fund, occupying the position of a plaintiff with the burden on each to support his claim or have his interplea dismissed. [33 C.J. 459; Commonwealth Trust Co. v. Du Mortimer, 193 Mo. App. 290 , 299, 183 S.W. 1137 .] In such situation each claimant must stand on the strength of his own claim rather than on the weakness of a rival claim. [3] We are mindful, of course, as contended by relators, that in this present proceeding our province is solely to determin

1934Louis Union Trust Co., 197 Mo. 281 , 291, 94 S.W. 890 .] Each claimant was required to and did by way of interplea assert his claim to the fund, occupying the position of a plaintiff with the burden on each to support his claim or have his interplea dismissed. [33 C.J. 459; Commonwealth Trust Co. v. Du Mortimer, 193 Mo. App. 290 , 299, 183 S.W. 1137 .] In such situation each claimant must stand on the strength of his own claim rather than on the weakness of a rival claim. [3] We are mindful, of course, as contended by relators, that in this present proceeding our province is solely to determin

11934–1934
Brownwell & Wight Car Co. v. Barnard neutral
mo · 1897
1 sentence

1903Car Co. v. Barnard, 139 Mo. 142 ; Graham Paper Co. v. Morton B.

11903–1903

Where else courts name it

UT 11 (1983–2020) MO 6 (1903–2009) MS 2 (1922–1995)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check