Legal Opinion

Fust v. Attorney General

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided June 17, 1997No. 79416PublishedCited by 61 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOLSTEIN, Chief Justice.

Carl and Rita Fust are judgment creditors. They were awarded $330,000 in punitive damages in a malicious prosecution action in 1994. This judgment was affirmed on appeal. Fust v. Francois, 913 S.W.2d 38 (Mo. App.1995). Here, the Fusts seek a declaratory judgment that sec. 537.675 1 , enacted as part of House Bill 700, Laws of 1987, p. 545, et seq. (HB 700), is unconstitutional. That section provides that 50% of any punitive damages judgment is deemed rendered in favor of the State of Missouri. The Circuit Court of Cole County found the statute constitutional. This…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Hodel v. IndianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Whitlow v. HodgesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Lincoln Credit Co. v. PeachSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
  5. Blaske v. Smith & Entzeroth, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1991

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by61 opinions

  1. Arbino v. Johnson & JohnsonOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Rhyne v. K-Mart Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2004
  3. Rodriguez v. Suzuki Motor Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1999
  4. Sanders v. AhmedSupreme Court of Missouri · 2012
  5. Missouri Health Care Ass'n v. Attorney GeneralSupreme Court of Missouri · 1997

56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API