Ruth v. State, 202 S.W.3d 638 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). · Go Syfert
Search
Ruth v. State, 202 S.W.3d 638 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
50 citation events (50 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Robert Coffin v. Farm Bureau Town & Country Insurance Company of Missouri (moctapp, 2024-12-24)
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2007 2016 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Robert Coffin v. Farm Bureau Town & Country Insurance Company of Missouri
Mo. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
Co., 301 S.W.3d 43, 47 (Mo. banc 2009) (quoting Versaw v. Versaw, 202 S.W.3d 638, 643 (Mo. App. S.D. 2006)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. v. Ream
W.D. Mo. · 2018 · confidence medium
“Estoppel will not be lightly embraced in an insurance coverage case; it only has application when all elements thereof clearly appear.” Versaw v. Versaw, 202 S.W.3d 638, 650 (Mo. App. 2006).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Shane S. Taylor v. Owners Insurance Company
Mo. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
Co., 301 S.W.3d 43, 47 (Mo. banc 2009) (quoting Versaw v. Versaw, 202 S.W.3d 638, 643 (Mo.App.S.D.2006)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Affirmative Insurance Co. v. Broeker (2×)
Mo. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
Id. at 644-45.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lexington Insurance v. Integrity Land Title Co.
E.D. Mo. · 2012 · confidence medium
“To estop an insurer from asserting a policy defense, Missouri law requires that the insured show (1) the insurer asserted a policy defense in denying coverage and later asserted another inconsistent ground, (2) the insurer’s actions induced the insured to rely on the original defense and thereby caused injury, and (3) the insured suffered prejudice as a result of such reliance.” 16 Versaw v. Versaw, 202 S.W.3d 638, 650 (Mo.Ct.App.2006).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Lero v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.
Mo. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
Versaw v. Versaw, 202 S.W.3d 638, 650 (Mo.App.2006).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Rice v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co.
Mo. · 2009 · confidence medium
“This rule is especially applicable where insurance is first ‘granted’ and is then followed by provisions limiting or avoiding liability.” Versaw, 202 S.W.3d at 643.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Maritz Holdings, Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co.
Mo. Ct. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
Versaw v. Versaw, 202 S.W.3d 638, 643 (Mo.App.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Miller's Classified Insurance Co. v. French Ex Rel. French
Mo. Ct. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
“This rule is especially applicable where insurance is first ‘granted’ and is then followed by provisions limiting or avoiding liability.” Versaw v. Versaw, 202 S.W.3d 638, 643 (Mo.App.
cited Cited "see" Joshua Munroe v. Continental Western Insurance
8th Cir. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally Versaw v. Versaw, 202 S.W.3d 638, 645 (Mo.App.2006).
discussed Cited "see" Jensen v. Allstate Insurance Co.
Mo. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See Versaw, 202 S.W.3d at 644 . 8 Here, in contrast, the phrase appears not only in Exclusion 8 but also in the policy’s insuring clause for liability coverage and multiple other places in the policy.
Phillip RUTH, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Missouri, Respondent
WD 65371.
Missouri Court of Appeals.
Aug 1, 2006.
202 S.W.3d 638
Phillip Anthony Ruth, Bowling Green, MO, pro se., Shaun J. Mackelprang, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Smart, Ulrich, Hardwick.
Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Phillip Ruth appeals from a judgment denying his Rule 74.06 motion to re-open post-conviction proceedings. Because Ruth’s motion failed to state a proper claim for relief under Rule 74.06, we affirm the motion court’s judgment.

No precedential purpose would be served by a published opinion, however, we have provided the parties with a Memorandum explaining the reasons for our decision. AFFIRMED. Rule 84.16(b).