44 Missouri opinions name it 2 courts 1961–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lowe v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.green2 sentences2014Co., 753 S.W.2d 891, 894-95 (Mo. banc 1988). 6 Further, an insurer’s obligation to act in good faith when settling a third-party claim is part of what the insured pays for with its premiums. 2014Co., 753 S.W.2d 891, 894-95 (Mo. banc 1988). 6 Further, an insurer’s obligation to act in good faith when settling a third-party claim is part of what the insured pays for with its premiums. | 2 | 2 |
State Ex Rel. Green v. Kimberlingreen2 sentences1987Green v. Kimberlin, 517 S.W.2d 124, 127 [3, 4] (Mo. banc 1974). 1987Green v. Kimberlin, 517 S.W.2d 124, 127 (Mo. banc 1974). | 2 | 2 |
Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Whitehead & Kales Co.green2 sentences1988Respondent contends this third party action is not within the statute’s compass because it is not a “cause of action for personal injuries,” but we hold that a third party claim for contribution and indemnification for liabilities incurred as a result of personal injury, which was recognized by this Court in Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Whitehead & Kales Co., 566 S.W.2d 466 (Mo. banc 1978), is within the meaning of the statute. 1988Respondent contends this third party action is not within the statute's compass because it is not a "cause of action for personal injuries," but we hold that a third party claim for contribution and indemnification for liabilities incurred as a result of personal injury, which was recognized by this Court in Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Whitehead & Kales Co., 566 S.W.2d 466 (Mo. banc 1978), is within the meaning of the statute. | 1 | 3 |
Price v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Price, 422 S.W.3d at 301 . 2020Price, 422 S.W.3d at 307 . | 1 | 2 |
Bank of Birch Tree v. Am. Modern Home Ins. Co.green1 sentence2022Co., 561 S.W.3d 439, 442 (Mo. App. S.D. 2018) (holding that a judgment was not final, despite severance of a third-party claim “for trial purposes only,” because it still “left pending, unresolved claims in the underlying case”). 6 Progressive argues that, under the doctrine of law of the case, we have essentially already determined that we have appellate jurisdiction by reviewing the prior decision granting summary judgment. | 1 | 1 |
cluster 777894green1 sentence2021Co., 292 F.3d 567, 573 (8th Cir. 2002) (Missouri law). 30 An insurer’s wrongful failure to defend constitutes a breach of contract. | 1 | 1 |
Rock Port Market, Inc. v. Affiliated Foods Midwest Cooperative, Inc.green1 sentence2021See also Rock Port Market, Inc. v. Affiliated Foods Midwest Coop., Inc., 532 S.W.3d 180, 188-89 (Mo. App. W.D. 2017) (tort of bad faith failure to settle arises where policy gives insurer “the absolute authority to evaluate and settle third- party claims against the insured,” and the insured is accordingly “subservient to the dominance of the insurer to settle a third-party claim”); Dairy Farmers of Am., Inc. v. Travelers Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Billings Mutual Insurance Co. v. Cameron Mutual Insurance Co.green1 sentence2020Co., 229 S.W.3d 138, 148 (Mo. App. S.D. 2007) (noting that the effect of an insured’s late notice of a claim may vary depending on “the type of insurance coverage involved (e.g., first-party coverage with no obligation by the insurer to provide the insured a defense compared to third-party coverage with such an obligation to defend)”); Bryan v. Peppers, 175 S.W.3d 714, 722 (Mo. App. S.D. 2005) (noting that “it is permissible for a plaintiff to sue his insurance company directly when bringing a first-party claim, but it is impermissible to sue a liability insurer directly when bringing a third- | 1 | 1 |
Bryan v. Peppersgreen1 sentence2020Co., 229 S.W.3d 138, 148 (Mo. App. S.D. 2007) (noting that the effect of an insured’s late notice of a claim may vary depending on “the type of insurance coverage involved (e.g., first-party coverage with no obligation by the insurer to provide the insured a defense compared to third-party coverage with such an obligation to defend)”); Bryan v. Peppers, 175 S.W.3d 714, 722 (Mo. App. S.D. 2005) (noting that “it is permissible for a plaintiff to sue his insurance company directly when bringing a first-party claim, but it is impermissible to sue a liability insurer directly when bringing a third- | 1 | 1 |
Henson v. Stategreen1 sentence2020See Henson, 518 S.W. 3d at 834 .8 Decision For the foregoing reasons, we determine that Movant’s initial PCR motion was not timely filed as required by Rule 29.15(b). | 1 | 1 |
Henderson v. Stategreen1 sentence2017Price v. State, 422 S.W.3d 292, 307 (Mo. banc 2014); see also Henderson v. State, 372 S.W.3d 11, 14 (Mo. App. 2012) (noting that, in rare circumstances, courts have made an exception when the movant’s pro se motion was not timely filed due to active interference by some third party). | 1 | 1 |
Crouch v. Tourtelotgreen1 sentence2013See, e.g., Crouch v. Tourtelot, 350 S.W.2d 799 (Mo. banc 1961). | 1 | 1 |
Whitehorn v. City of Poplar Bluffgreen1 sentence2007Whitehorn v. City of Poplar Bluff, 208 S.W.3d 930, 931 (Mo.App.2006); In re C.M.L., 165 S.W.3d 522, 523 (Mo.App.2005). 1 Alternatively, if the trial court truly severed the third-party claim, Third-Party Defendants lack standing to appeal since they are not parties to this judgment and were not parties to its underlying action. | 1 | 1 |
In Re KKJgreen1 sentence2007See, e.g., In re K.K.J., 984 S.W.2d 548 , 551 (Mo.App.1999). | 1 | 1 |
In the Interest of C.M.L. v. Greene County Juvenile Officegreen1 sentence2007Whitehorn v. City of Poplar Bluff, 208 S.W.3d 930, 931 (Mo.App.2006); In re C.M.L., 165 S.W.3d 522, 523 (Mo.App.2005). 1 Alternatively, if the trial court truly severed the third-party claim, Third-Party Defendants lack standing to appeal since they are not parties to this judgment and were not parties to its underlying action. | 1 | 1 |
Kabir v. Missouri Department of Social Servicesgreen1 sentence2000Similarly, while Ms. Calarosa claims that the trial court erred in denying John Calarosa’s motion for summary judgment on the third-party claim, “it is well-settled that the denial of a motion for summary judgment is not subject to appellate review ... even when an appeal is taken from a final judgment and not from the denial of a motion for summary judgment.” Kabir v. Missouri Dept. of Social Services, 845 S.W.2d 102, 103 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
Cook v. Sunnen Products Corp.green1 sentence1999Relying on the principle that the workers’ compensation law is to be construed liberally to resolve all doubts in favor of the employee, Cook v. Sunnen Products Corp., 937 S.W.2d 221, 228 [1] (Mo.App.1996); § 287.800, Claimant contends that “if anyone is to be better off, it should be the employee. | 1 | 1 |
Hannett v. Stategreen1 sentence1999See Anderson, 823 S.W.2d at 110-11 ; Shortt, 765 S.W.2d at 389 . | 1 | 1 |
American Bank of Richmond v. Missouri Farmers Ass'ngreen1 sentence1995American Bank of Richmond v. Missouri Farmers Ass’n., 695 S.W.2d 150, 152 (Mo.App.W.D.1985). | 1 | 1 |
| State Ex Rel. Ashcroft v. Gibbargreen | 1 | 1 |
| AAA Excavating, Inc. v. Francis Construction, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Southtown Dental Center v. Patrickgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Gast v. Ebertgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Kahn v. Prahlgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Pittman v. Great American Life Insurance Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State Ex Rel. Garrison Wagner Co. v. Schaaf
green
2 sentences2019Garrison Wagner Co. v. Schaaf, 528 S.W.2d 438 (Mo. banc 1975), held that a third-party claim could be maintained in a lawsuit without regard to the residence of the third-party defendant. 1986Garrison Wagner Co. v. Schaaf, 528 S.W.2d 438 (Mo. banc 1975), held that a third-party claim could be maintained in a lawsuit without regard to the residence of the third-party defendant. | 4 | 1983–2019 |
Missouri Public Entity Risk Management Fund v. American Casualty Co. of Reading
green
2 sentences2014A right to equitable subrogation belongs to “one, not a volunteer, who pays another’s debt, to recover the amount paid, which in good conscious should be paid by the one primarily responsible for the loss.” Id. at 74 (quoting 4 New Appleman Law of Liability Ins. sec. 42.01 (2012)). 2014A right to equitable sub-rogation belongs to “one, not a volunteer, who pays another’s debt, to recover the amount paid, which in good conscience should be paid by the one primarily responsible for the loss.” Id. at 74 (quoting 4 New Appleman Law of Liability Ins. sec. 42.01 (2012)). | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Schmitz v. Great American Assurance Co.
green
2 sentences2020The majority then cites Schmitz v. Great American Assurance Co., 337 S.W.3d 700 (Mo. banc 2011), for the premise that, where an insurer refuses to defend its insured against a third party claim, the insured can then enter into a section 537.065 agreement with the claimant, and thereafter the insurer “cannot have its cake and eat it too by both refusing coverage and at the same time continuing to control the terms of settlement in defense of an action it had refused to defend.” Id. at 710 . 2020The majority then cites Schmitz v. Great American Assurance Co., 337 S.W.3d 700 (Mo. banc 2011), for the premise that, where an insurer refuses to defend its insured against a third party claim, the insured can then enter into a section 537.065 agreement with the claimant, and thereafter the insurer “cannot have its cake and eat it too by both refusing coverage and at the same time continuing to control the terms of settlement in defense of an action it had refused to defend.” Id. at 710 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Charles v. Consumers Insurance
green
2 sentences2016Whereas in a third-party claim, as is the case here, the policyholder (Wife) “is sued by a third party and seeks a defense or coverage in the event of a judgment against [her].” Id. 2016“In the third party liability claim context, the insurance carrier has no right to intervene in litigation between its policyholder and the third party; the carrier can participate in the litigation only pursuant to its contractual obligation to defend the policyholder.” Id. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Stephenson v. McClure
green
1 sentence2013To the extent that Stephenson v. McClure, 606 S.W.2d 208 (Mo.App.1980), and cases following it 1 require a third-party petition to contain an admission of fault and to the extent they suggest that this Court’s decision in Mo. Pac. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Cook ex rel. Cook v. Willis
green
1 sentence2012The defendant’s litigation of this issue against an adverse party and the trial court’s decision against it on the merits prevented the defendant from arguing the mother’s negligence in closing argument. 885 S.W.2d at 793-94 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Shortt v. Lasswell
green
1 sentence1999See Anderson, 823 S.W.2d at 110-11 ; Shortt, 765 S.W.2d at 389 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
MLJ Investments, Inc. v. Reid
green
1 sentence1999Id. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
American States Insurance Co. v. Kiger
green
1 sentence1999The Kigers’ policy included “an explicit ‘pollution exclusion’ clause.” It stated that the policy coverage did not apply to: “Bodily injury,” “property damage” or loss, cost or expense arising out of the actual, alleged or threatened discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration, release or escape of “pollutants.” Id. at 948 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Major v. Frontenac Industries, Inc.
green
1 sentence1998Id. at 899 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp. green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Ohlendorf v. Feinstein
green
1 sentence1995Id. at 557 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Douglass v. Safire green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Bond Diamond Co. v. Wilson green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| State Ex Rel. General Electric Co. v. Gaertner green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Foster v. Bi-State Development Agency green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| McDonnell Aircraft Corp. v. Hartman-Hanks-Walsh Painting Co. green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Seaboard Coast Line RR Co. v. Smith green | 1 | 1980–1980 |
| State Ex Rel. Fletcher v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co. green | 1 | 1976–1976 |
| Bolf v. Wise green | 1 | 1973–1973 |
| Geborek Ex Rel. Geborek v. Briggs Transportation Co. green | 1 | 1971–1971 |
| Hipp v. Kansas City Public Service Co. green | 1 | 1971–1971 |
| King v. Shepherd green | 1 | 1961–1961 |
| Memphis Bank & Trust Co. v. West green | 1 | 1961–1961 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.