{"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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"corizon-medical-et-al","displayName":"Corizon Medical, et al","totalCases":1},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappwd:wd83550:2020-08-25","opinionId":"62334cb7-c1b3-5706-9ba9-6fe941284b51","slug":"michael-rauch-v-corizon-medical-et-al-d83550","caseName":"Michael Rauch\nvs. \nCorizon Medical, et al","caseNumber":"WD83550","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2020-08-25","year":2020,"display_summary":"Michael Rauch, a pro se appellant, appealed the dismissal of his petition against Corizon Medical and others, which alleged claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for inadequate medical care. The trial court had dismissed his petition for failure to state a claim. The appellate court dismissed Rauch's appeal, finding significant deficiencies in his appellate brief, particularly regarding the statement of facts and points relied on, which prevented a meaningful review of his claims.","primaryTopic":"appellate-procedure","topicSlugs":["appellate-procedure","civil-procedure"],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=164599","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/michael-rauch-v-corizon-medical-et-al-d83550","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: employment"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: civil-procedure","topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"respondent"}]}