Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 1.170 (2026)

Repeal of law not to affect rights acquired thereunder

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1.170. Repeal of law not to affect rights acquired thereunder. — The repeal of any statutory provision does not affect any act done or right accrued or established in any proceeding, suit or prosecution had or commenced in any civil case previous to the time when the repeal takes effect; but every such act, right and proceeding remains as valid and effectual as if the provisions so repealed had remained in force.

--------

(RSMo 1939 § 660, A.L. 1957 p. 587)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 660; 1919 § 7063; 1909 § 8062

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 21 cases, 1974–2019 · leading case: Boyle v. Vista Eyewear, Inc., 700 S.W.2d 859 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Boyle v. Vista Eyewear, Inc., 700 S.W.2d 859 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 18× “Moreover, when the legislature repeals an existing statute, it is considered to have done so in contemplation of the general savings statutes, §§ 1.170 and 1.180 RSMo 1978. Unless the legislature specifically provides that the repeal be retroactive, it is presumed that these…”

Arie v. Intertherm, Inc., 648 S.W.2d 142 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “170 the repeal of any statutory provision does not affect any act done or right accrued or established in any proceeding, suit or prosecution, had or commenced in any civil case previous to the time when the repeal takes effect; but every such act, right and proceeding remain as…”

Vaughan v. Taft Broad. Co., 708 S.W.2d 656 (Mo. 1986). · cites it 2× “In addition, the court in Deering concluded that the 1982 statute should not be applied retrospectively because sections 1.170 and 1.180, RSMo 1978, prevent pending actions from being affected by a repealing statute.”

Prot. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Kansas City, 551 S.W.2d 909 (Mo. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 3× “A saving provision sufficient for the purposes of this case is provided in the companion statutory provisions §§ 1.170 and 1.180 RSMo 1969. The first of those statutes provides as follows: “The repeal of any statutory provision does not affect any act done or right accrued or…”

Comerio v. Beatrice Foods Co., 595 F. Supp. 918 (E.D. Mo. 1984). · cites it 4× “The new statute requires a request for a service letter to be "in writing by certified mail to the superintendent, manager or registered agent of said corporation, with specific reference to the statute.”

Goodman v. St. Louis Child.'s Hosp., 687 S.W.2d 889 (Mo. 1985). · cites it 4× “He further relies on the general savings statute, § 1.170 RSMo 1978, which provides that the repeal of a statute may not affect any accrued or established right.”

Kocherov v. Kocherov, 775 S.W.2d 539 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 3× “Sheilah next contends that § 1.170 and § 1.180, RSMo 1986, prevent the support payments from being terminated.”

State ex rel. Deering v. Corcoran, 652 S.W.2d 228 (Mo. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “Moreover, when the legislature repeals an existing statute, it is considered to have done so in contemplation of the general savings statutes §§ 1.170 and 1.180, RSMo 1978. 2 Unless the legislature specifically provides that the repeal be retroactive, it is presumed that these…”

Linda Jasperson, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Purolator Courier Corp., Appellee/cross-Appellant, 765 F.2d 736 (8th Cir. 1985). “Mo.Rev.Stat. § 1.170 provides that repeal of a statute *739 does not affect a “right accrued or established in any proceeding, suit or prosecution.”

Keeran v. Myers, 172 S.W.3d 466 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “Additionally, Appellants posit error in the trial court’s application of the savings statutes, sections 1.170 and 1.180, which permitted Grandmother to proceed under section 452.”

Robinson v. Heath, 633 S.W.2d 203 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “1 Defendants *205 claim that the rights of plaintiff and her husband’s parents were fixed at the time of Douglas Robinson’s death and that under § 1.170, RSMo 1978, the change in § 537.-080 cannot affect those rights.”

United Investors Life v. Wilson, 191 S.W.3d 76 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 6× “Section 1.170 provides: *79 The repeal of any statutory provision does not affect any act done or right accrued or established in any proceeding, suit, or prosecution had or commenced in any civil case previous to the time when the repeal takes effect; but every such act, right…”

Show all 21 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.