{"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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"st-louis-county","displayName":"St. Louis County","totalCases":9},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappd:ed110948:2023-04-04","opinionId":"4eb12b84-ad9c-583a-b650-c88f10024b48","slug":"st-louis-police-officers-association-respondent-v-st-louis-county-appella-110948","caseName":"St. Louis Police Officer's Association, Respondent, vs. St. Louis County, Appellant.","caseNumber":"ED110948","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2023-04-04","year":2023,"display_summary":"The St. Louis Police Officer's Association (SLPOA) sought to represent investigators and non-supervisory attorneys in St. Louis County's prosecuting attorney's office. After the County refused voluntary recognition, an election was held, which the SLPOA won. The County subsequently refused to bargain, arguing the election was void because it was not conducted by the Missouri State Board of Mediation, especially after House Bill 1413 (HB 1413) was declared unconstitutional. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the SLPOA, holding that the pre-HB 1413 public sector labor law does not require such elections to be conducted by the Board, and thus the County's refusal to bargain violated the employees' constitutional rights.","primaryTopic":"employment-law","topicSlugs":["employment-law","civil-procedure","summary-judgment","appellate-procedure"],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=194099","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/st-louis-police-officers-association-respondent-v-st-louis-county-appella-110948","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":32,"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":"moappd:ed108623:2020-11-17","opinionId":"2f4c588a-5dc7-544b-ba32-116b155419ce","slug":"st-louis-county-respondent-v-janet-shanklin-appellant-108623","caseName":"St. Louis County, Respondent, vs. Janet Shanklin, Appellant.","caseNumber":"ED108623","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2020-11-17","year":2020,"display_summary":"Janet Shanklin appealed pro se her conviction by a jury for three counts of violating orders of protection and one count of harassment. The trial court sentenced her to confinement and probation. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, finding that Shanklin's brief substantially failed to comply with the mandatory appellate briefing standards of Missouri Supreme Court Rule 84.04, thereby preserving nothing for review.","primaryTopic":"appellate-procedure","topicSlugs":["appellate-procedure","civil-procedure","criminal-procedure","other"],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=169195","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/st-louis-county-respondent-v-janet-shanklin-appellant-108623","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":36,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappd:ed100518:2014-06-24","opinionId":"9e49438d-df24-5405-a783-083c6f7cf3e4","slug":"st-louis-county-respondent-v-avivi-heiman-appellant-100518","caseName":"St. Louis County, Respondent, vs. Avivi Heiman, Appellant.","caseNumber":"ED100518","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2014-06-24","year":2014,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"unknown","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=74639","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/st-louis-county-respondent-v-avivi-heiman-appellant-100518","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappd:ed94374:2010-12-28","opinionId":"921f394f-4fd5-5424-9437-4616852ee04a","slug":"st-louis-county-respondent-v-sandra-himes-appellant-d94374","caseName":"St. Louis County, Respondent, v. Sandra Himes, Appellant.","caseNumber":"ED94374","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2010-12-28","year":2010,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=43309","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/st-louis-county-respondent-v-sandra-himes-appellant-d94374","relatedPracticeAreas":[],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappd:ed94279:2010-06-29","opinionId":"98c1984d-12dd-51dd-878a-cb3a5d965c3c","slug":"st-louis-county-respondent-v-david-skaer-appellant-d94279","caseName":"St. Louis County, Respondent, v. David Skaer, Appellant.","caseNumber":"ED94279","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2010-06-29","year":2010,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"reversed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=39778","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/st-louis-county-respondent-v-david-skaer-appellant-d94279","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappd:doc-13877:undated","opinionId":"f4c9f242-7740-5962-9406-22175decfae4","slug":"st-louis-county-respondent-v-russell-schenewerk-defendant-appellant-13877","caseName":"St. Louis County, Respondent, v. Russell Schenewerk, Defendant-Appellant.","caseNumber":null,"court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":null,"year":1999,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"reversed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=13877","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/st-louis-county-respondent-v-russell-schenewerk-defendant-appellant-13877","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappd:ed112783:undated","opinionId":"981c6866-6dee-53c7-b9fb-48949c8b35d8","slug":"hazel-erby-appellant-v-st-louis-county-respondent-112783","caseName":"Hazel Erby, Appellant, vs. St. Louis County, Respondent.","caseNumber":"ED112783","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":null,"year":2025,"display_summary":"Hazel Erby, through her estate's personal representative, appealed the circuit court's dismissal of her claims against St. Louis County. Erby's amended petition alleged violations of the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA) and the Public Employee Whistleblower Statute (PEWS). The circuit court dismissed the claims, finding they abated upon Erby's death because they were not \"personal injuries\" under the survivorship statute. The appellate court reversed, holding that MHRA and PEWS claims are injuries to a person's \"rights\" or \"body\" and therefore survive under § 537.020, RSMo.","primaryTopic":"employment-law","topicSlugs":["employment-law","civil-procedure","administrative-law","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=217397","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/hazel-erby-appellant-v-st-louis-county-respondent-112783","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":"moappd:ed84765:undated","opinionId":"f0ecbc28-b711-58d2-8e52-ab71cf2868a5","slug":"fw-disposal-south-llc-respondent-v-st-louis-county-appellant-d84765","caseName":"F.W. Disposal South, LLC, Respondent v. St. Louis County, Appellant.","caseNumber":"ED84765","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":null,"year":2005,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=15763","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/fw-disposal-south-llc-respondent-v-st-louis-county-appellant-d84765","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"real-estate","label":"Real Estate","href":"/practice-areas/real-estate","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/real-estate"}],"role":"appellant"},{"caseId":"moappd:doc-13403:undated","opinionId":"6d5bae9a-1302-5e8a-87dd-b40b6ea8fbdd","slug":"st-louis-county-respondent-v-joseph-p-afshari-appellant-13403","caseName":"St. Louis County, Respondent, v. Joseph P. Afshari, 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=13403","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/st-louis-county-respondent-v-joseph-p-afshari-appellant-13403","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"}],"role":"respondent"}]}