Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 285 SW3D 356 - Jones v. Jones

Jones v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Mo. Nat. Educ. v. Mo. State Bd. of Educ. · Kingsley v. Burack · Atkins v. McPhetridge · Faith Baptist Church of Berkeley, Inc. v. Heffner · Crawford County Concerned Citizens v. Missouri Department of Natural Resources

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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(b) If a person as described [in paragraph (a) ] cannot be made a party, the court shall determine whether in equity and good conscience the action should proceed among the parties before it or should be dismissed, the absent party being thus regarded as indispensable. The factors to be considered by the court include: (i) to what extent a judgment rendered in the person’s absence might be prejudicial to that person or those already parties; (ii) the extent to which by protective provisions in the judgment, by the shaping of relief, or other measures, the prejudice can be lessened or avoided; (iii) whether a judgment rendered in the person’s absence will be adequate; and (iv) whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoin-der.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) A person shall be joined in the action if: (1) in the person’s absence complete relief cannot be accorded among those already parties, or (2) the person claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that the disposition of the action in the person’s absence may: (i) as a practical matter impair or impede the person’s ability to protect that interest or (ii) leave any of the persons already parties subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations by reason of the claimed interest. If the person has not been joined, the court shall order that the person be made a party. If the person should join as a plaintiff but refuses to do so, the person may be made a defendant.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Notwithstanding noncompliance with Rule 84.04, appellate courts may exercise discretion and attempt to resolve issues on their merits unless the defective point impedes disposition of the case on its merits.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.