236 Mo. App. 1149 - Foster v. Kurn’s Empirical Analysis
1942
Citation profile
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Brunk v. Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. · State ex rel. Central Coal & Coke Co. v. Ellison · Lynch v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad · Toeneboehn v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. · State Ex Rel. City of St. Charles v. Haid
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Defendants contend that in order to find enough evidence to support its finding that the box car was moving at the time the collision occurred the jury must have relied, in part, on evidence offered by defendants. It was proper for the jury to do that. `Plaintiff is entitled to have the benefit of defendant's testimony to help out her own case so far as it does not involve a repudiation of her petition and general trial theory. And the jury may believe all of his testimony or may accept it in part and reject it in part just as it finds the same to be true or false when considered in relation to the other testimony and the facts and circumstances in the case.' Pabst v. Armbruster, Mo.App., 91 S.W.2d 652, 657 ."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Baker v. Norris
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.