{"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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"missouri-commission-on-human-rights","displayName":"Missouri Commission on Human Rights","totalCases":9},"cases":[{"caseId":"mo:sc99000:2022-08-09","opinionId":"d786c35c-ce7f-504e-a85b-e1bdaa0ce69a","slug":"state-ex-rel-jim-swoboda-respondent-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-c99000","caseName":"State ex rel. Jim Swoboda, Respondent, vs. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Appellant, Alisa Warren, Appellant, and Armstrong Teasdale, LLP, Appellant.","caseNumber":"SC99000","court":"mo","courtLabel":"Supreme Court of Missouri","decisionDate":"2022-08-09","year":2022,"display_summary":"Jim Swoboda filed a discrimination charge against the Law Firm with the Missouri Commission on Human Rights, which dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction. Swoboda sought judicial review, and the circuit court issued a permanent writ of mandamus directing the Commission to accept and investigate the charge. The Missouri Supreme Court reversed, holding that Swoboda failed to establish a clear, unequivocal, specific right to mandamus relief because the question of whether the Missouri Human Rights Act requires an employment relationship for such claims was an issue of first impression.","primaryTopic":"administrative-law","topicSlugs":["administrative-law","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review","civil-procedure","employment-law"],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=188453","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/state-ex-rel-jim-swoboda-respondent-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-c99000","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":36,"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:wd79758:2017-04-25","opinionId":"57391890-2a77-5c54-ad50-a3754725f76e","slug":"christopher-klee-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-d79758","caseName":"Christopher Klee\nvs.\nMissouri Commission on Human Rights","caseNumber":"WD79758","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2017-04-25","year":2017,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=112056","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/christopher-klee-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-d79758","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappd:ed76175:undated","opinionId":"ab0b2959-1da2-5a66-a9c4-fa924f725ca0","slug":"carolena-van-den-berk-appellant-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-res-d76175","caseName":"Carolena Van Den Berk, Appellant, v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Respondent.","caseNumber":"ED76175","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":null,"year":2000,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=14153","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/carolena-van-den-berk-appellant-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-res-d76175","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"personal-injury","label":"Personal Injury","href":"/practice-areas/personal-injury","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/personal-injury"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappwd:doc-17766:undated","opinionId":"5c643cb8-401f-5752-bedd-f80902d41d02","slug":"missouri-commission-on-human-rights-appellant-v-red-dragon-restaurant-inc-17766","caseName":"Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Appellant, v. Red Dragon Restaurant, Inc., Respondent.","caseNumber":null,"court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":null,"year":1999,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=17766","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/missouri-commission-on-human-rights-appellant-v-red-dragon-restaurant-inc-17766","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"}],"role":"appellant"},{"caseId":"moappd:doc-13633:undated","opinionId":"1d722559-7c28-5773-90e8-c9f547566047","slug":"frederick-gerlach-president-lake-holiday-inc-dba-lake-holiday-pool-and-pa-13633","caseName":"Frederick Gerlach, President, Lake Holiday, Inc., d/b/a Lake Holiday Pool and Park, Respondent, v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Appellant.","caseNumber":null,"court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":null,"year":1998,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=13633","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/frederick-gerlach-president-lake-holiday-inc-dba-lake-holiday-pool-and-pa-13633","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"}],"role":"appellant"},{"caseId":"moappwd:wd86885:undated","opinionId":"14625691-f6ae-5f5d-bc7b-9ee6039969ba","slug":"mary-mcclendon-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-d86885","caseName":"Mary McClendon\nvs. \nMissouri Commission on Human Rights","caseNumber":"WD86885","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":null,"year":2025,"display_summary":"Mary McClendon sued the Missouri Commission on Human Rights (MCHR) for damages under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA), alleging aiding/abetting and retaliation. McClendon claimed the MCHR unlawfully delayed issuing a right-to-sue notice for her prior discrimination charge against her former employer. The trial court granted the MCHR's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The appellate court affirmed, holding that McClendon failed to allege facts showing the MCHR provided substantial encouragement for aiding/abetting or that its delay constituted an actionable adverse impact for retaliation, as her ability to pursue her original claims was ultimately preserved.","primaryTopic":"employment-law","topicSlugs":["employment-law","administrative-law","civil-procedure","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=220037","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/mary-mcclendon-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-d86885","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":38,"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":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappwd:wd87191:undated","opinionId":"1f94c3cf-1b20-57c1-9c36-198409759c03","slug":"barbara-vega-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-d87191","caseName":"Barbara Vega\nvs. \nMissouri Commission on Human Rights","caseNumber":"WD87191","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":null,"year":2025,"display_summary":"Barbara Vega sued the Missouri Commission on Human Rights, alleging the Commission engaged in unlawful discriminatory practices of aiding/abetting and retaliation by delaying the issuance of a right-to-sue notice on her prior discrimination charge against her former employer. The trial court granted the Commission's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Vega failed to state actionable claims for aiding/abetting and retaliation because the Commission's delay did not constitute substantial encouragement to her former employer nor an actionable adverse impact on Vega, as her ability to pursue a private action was ultimately preserved.","primaryTopic":"employment-law","topicSlugs":["employment-law","civil-procedure","appellate-procedure","governmental-immunity"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=220040","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/barbara-vega-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-d87191","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":38,"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":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappwd:wd65985:undated","opinionId":"be1f0f1b-e8c0-5f26-b501-529a94957e45","slug":"buchheit-inc-appellant-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-respondent-d65985","caseName":"Buchheit, Inc., Appellant, v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Respondent.","caseNumber":"WD65985","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":null,"year":2007,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=21549","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/buchheit-inc-appellant-v-missouri-commission-on-human-rights-respondent-d65985","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappd:ed75509:undated","opinionId":"afaa5ac2-167c-5270-afa1-9ec5b718b891","slug":"james-f-conway-charles-e-mischeaux-matthew-j-padberg-anne-marie-clarke-fr-d75509","caseName":"James F. Conway, Charles E. Mischeaux, Matthew J. Padberg Anne-Marie Clarke, Freeman Bosley, Jr., Rodney A. Williams, St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners, Appellants, v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Respondent.","caseNumber":"ED75509","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":null,"year":1999,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=13924","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/james-f-conway-charles-e-mischeaux-matthew-j-padberg-anne-marie-clarke-fr-d75509","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"personal-injury","label":"Personal Injury","href":"/practice-areas/personal-injury","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/personal-injury"}],"role":"respondent"}]}