Hemann v. Camolaur, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “Counsel on both sides of the bar are permitted wide latitude and discretion in referring to evidence and arguing inferences during closing argument.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Rogers v. Hester Ex Rel. Mills
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2010-12-01· cited 25×
• Kesterson v. Wallut
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2004-12-07· cited 22×
• Burrows v. Union Pacific Railroad
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2007-01-23· cited 19×
• State v. Hashman
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2006-04-04· cited 17×
• Rois v. H.C. Sharp Co.
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2006-10-17· cited 8×
• Minze v. Mo. Dep't of Pub. Safety
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2017-12-05· cited 5×
• Potter v. Kley
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2013-10-22· cited 3×
• Gary Veal v. Stacey Kelam
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2020-06-23

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Lester v. Sayles
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1993-04-20· cited 111×
• Nelson v. Waxman
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 2000-01-11· cited 99×
• Hoffman v. Illinois Terminal Railroad Company
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1955-01-18· cited 31×
• Campbell v. Labor & Industrial Relations Commission
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1995-09-26· cited 29×
• Coats v. Hickman
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1999-12-28· cited 18×
• Anderson v. Village of Jacksonville
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2003-01-31· cited 14×
• Chailland v. Smiley
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1963-01-14· cited 13×
• Eaves v. Wampler
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 1965-05-18· cited 11×