{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"aaron-m-malin","displayName":"Aaron M. Malin","totalCases":4},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappwd:wd85703:2023-09-19","opinionId":"94c60e48-c288-5490-a9b6-c453504693ae","slug":"aaron-m-malin-v-cole-county-prosecuting-attorney-d85703","caseName":"Aaron M. Malin\nvs.\nCole County Prosecuting Attorney","caseNumber":"WD85703","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2023-09-19","year":2023,"display_summary":"Aaron M. Malin appealed the denial of his motion to enforce a prior judgment against the Cole County Prosecuting Attorney for multiple Sunshine Law violations. The original judgment had ordered the Prosecutor to search for and produce all responsive public records. The trial court denied Malin's motion, finding the Prosecutor's search sufficient, allowing the Prosecutor to condition further searches on Malin paying costs, and applying principles of collateral estoppel and law of the case. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the Original Judgment did not condition the search on payment, the Prosecutor had waived the right to charge costs, and the prior contempt judgment did not preclude the current enforcement action.","primaryTopic":"administrative-law","topicSlugs":["administrative-law","civil-procedure","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"modified","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=201195","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/aaron-m-malin-v-cole-county-prosecuting-attorney-d85703","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"family","label":"Family Law","href":"/practice-areas/family","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/family"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"},{"caseId":"moappwd:wd85453:2023-05-16","opinionId":"3e3415f7-9871-5d09-aef3-b2c90abac0ad","slug":"aaron-m-malin-v-missouri-association-of-community-task-forces-dba-act-mis-d85453","caseName":"Aaron M. Malin\nvs. \nMissouri Association of Community Task Forces (d/b/a/ ACT Missouri)","caseNumber":"WD85453","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2023-05-16","year":2023,"display_summary":"Aaron Malin appealed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of ACT Missouri, arguing the court erred in concluding ACT Missouri is not a quasi-public governmental body under Missouri's Sunshine Law. This case followed a prior remand where the appellate court instructed the trial court to consider additional factors beyond the articles of incorporation. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no legal error in its conclusion that ACT Missouri's primary purpose, when considering all relevant factors, does not subject it to the Sunshine Law.","primaryTopic":"administrative-law","topicSlugs":["administrative-law","summary-judgment","civil-procedure","appellate-procedure"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=195376","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/aaron-m-malin-v-missouri-association-of-community-task-forces-dba-act-mis-d85453","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"},{"caseId":"moappwd:wd83774:2021-07-27","opinionId":"126b7a9c-ef06-5d33-b097-3a7f71878ff3","slug":"aaron-m-malin-v-cole-county-prosecuting-attorney-d83774","caseName":"Aaron M. Malin\nvs. \nCole County Prosecuting Attorney","caseNumber":"WD83774","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2021-07-27","year":2021,"display_summary":"Aaron M. Malin appealed the circuit court's denial of his motion for civil contempt, which sought to enforce a prior judgment requiring the Cole County Prosecuting Attorney to search for and produce records under the Sunshine Law. The appellate court affirmed the denial, finding that Malin's first two points on appeal failed to comply with Rule 84.04(d) and challenged actions the trial court did not take. The court also denied Malin's third point for lack of preservation and his fourth point regarding attorney's fees, concluding his unsuccessful contempt efforts were not necessary to preserve the prior judgment.","primaryTopic":"appellate-procedure","topicSlugs":["appellate-procedure","civil-procedure","administrative-law"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=179014","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/aaron-m-malin-v-cole-county-prosecuting-attorney-d83774","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"},{"caseId":"moappwd:wd81583:2019-01-15","opinionId":"4409c8f7-49bc-5434-8722-afb12b864b84","slug":"aaron-m-malin-v-cole-county-prosecuting-attorney-d81583","caseName":"Aaron M. Malin\nvs.\nCole County Prosecuting Attorney","caseNumber":"WD81583","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2019-01-15","year":2019,"display_summary":"Aaron Malin requested public records from the Cole County Prosecuting Attorney's Office under Missouri's Sunshine Law. The Prosecutor provided general objections and refused to search for or disclose records, leading Malin to file suit. The circuit court granted summary judgment for Malin, ordering the production of records and imposing a $12,100 civil penalty. The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's judgment, clarifying that the order to produce \"open records\" allowed for withholding exempt material if proper procedures were followed, and declined to review the penalty amount due to lack of preservation.","primaryTopic":"administrative-law","topicSlugs":["administrative-law","civil-procedure","summary-judgment","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=135596","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/aaron-m-malin-v-cole-county-prosecuting-attorney-d81583","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"}]}