Case Citator › Charles Richard Stone v. Rick Harry Anita Schlank Deborah Konieska Rhonda Heskin Amy Anderson Lori Parkos Jim Lind

Charles Richard Stone v. Rick Harry Anita Schlank Deborah Konieska Rhonda Heskin Amy Anderson Lori Parkos Jim Lind

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Good law
Court
Eighth Circuit
Citation
364 F.3d 912
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
37 of 37
Citing cases (total)
37
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. Stone v. Harry remains good law: all 37 flagged citations have been read, and none adversely treated the decision. The citing courts applied Stone's rule that pro se pleadings receive liberal construction but must allege enough facts to support the claims.
More on how this was screened

Nearby references to overruling, abrogation, or other adverse action concern different decisions or procedural rulings.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

37 later cases cite Charles Richard Stone v. Rick Harry Anita Schlank Deborah Konieska Rhonda Heskin Amy Anderson Lori Parkos Jim Lind; 37 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Charles Richard Stone v. Rick Harry Anita Schlank Deborah Konieska Rhonda Heskin Amy Anderson Lori Parkos Jim Lind?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 37 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Charles Richard Stone v. Rick Harry Anita Schlank Deborah Konieska Rhonda Heskin Amy Anderson Lori Parkos Jim Lind and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace