Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 789 SW2D 491 - Ritterbusch v. Holt

Ritterbusch v. Holt’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Gibson v. Brewer (1997), Kelly v. Golden (2003)

9 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

260199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Michel v. United States · Shapiro v. Columbia Union National Bank & Trust Co. · Fischer, Spuhl, Herzwurm & Associates, Inc. v. Forrest T. Jones & Co. · Stafford v. Muster · Moffett v. Commerce Trust Company

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

  1. “‘A pleading alleging abuse of process must set forth ultimate facts establishing the following elements: (1) the present defendant [the Krakovers] made an illegal, improper, perverted use of process, a use neither warranted nor authorized by the process; (2) the defendant had an improper purpose in exercising such illegal, perverted or improper use of process; and (3) damage resulted.’”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A petition is sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim if it invokes substantive principles of law entitling plaintiff to relief and alleges ultimate facts informing defendant of that which plaintiff will attempt to establish at trial. Fischer, Spuhl, Herzwurm & Associates, Inc. v. Forrest T. Jones & Co., 686 S.W.2d 310 , 316 (Mo. banc 1979). It is not to be dismissed for mere lack of definiteness or certainty or because of informality in the statement of an essential fact. Merriman v. Caton, 395 S.W.2d 106, 109 (Mo. 1965).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Stated another way, the test as to whether there is an abuse of process is whether the process has been used to accomplish some end which is outside the regular purview of the process.” Ritterbusch v. Holt, 789 S.W.2d 491 , 493 n. 1 (Mo.1990) (en banc). 5 .”
    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.