Weinstock v. Holden

How courts have described this case

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

• finding “subject to appropriations” to mean “[o]nly after appropriation does [entitlement become] legally enforceable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Norman Seay v. Tim Jones
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2014-09-15· cited 16×
• Peggy Stevens McGraw and Samuel C. Jones, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. State of Missouri, Missouri State Employees' Retirement System, Missouri Commissioner of Administration Doug Nelson, and Missouri State Treasurer Clint Zweifel
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 2016-05-24
• Opinion No. (2011)
  Missouri Attorney General Reports· 2011-03-21
• Butte County, Idaho v. United States
  Federal Claims· 2021-01-19

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Bank of Washington v. McAuliffe
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1984-09-11· cited 56×
• State Ex Rel. Jones v. Atterbury
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1957-04-08· cited 39×
• Missouri Coalition for the Environment v. Joint Committee on Administrative Rules
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1997-02-25· cited 32×
• State Ex Rel. Upchurch v. Blunt
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1991-06-05· cited 19×
• Padberg v. Roos
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1966-04-11· cited 13×
• Bohrer v. Toberman
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1950-03-13· cited 10×
• Weinstock v. Holden
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1999-02-09· cited 8×
• State Highways & Transportation Commission v. Director, Missouri Department of Revenue
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1984-07-17· cited 6×
• Consolidated School District No. 1 of Jackson County v. Jackson County
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1996-12-17· cited 6×
• State ex rel. Royal Insurance v. Director of the Missouri Department of Insurance
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1995-02-21· cited 4×