{"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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"state-of-missouri-and-andrew-bailey-missouri-attorney-general","displayName":"State of Missouri, and Andrew Bailey, Missouri Attorney General","totalCases":2},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappd:ed112792:2025-03-25","opinionId":"666acc45-1c43-5885-9dbe-0cf40320d43d","slug":"city-of-st-louis-respondent-v-state-of-missouri-and-andrew-bailey-missour-112792","caseName":"City of St. Louis, Respondent, vs. State of Missouri, and Andrew Bailey, Missouri Attorney General, Appellants.","caseNumber":"ED112792","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2025-03-25","year":2025,"display_summary":"The City of St. Louis sought reimbursement from the State Legal Expense Fund (SLEF) for a $250,000 settlement paid to a plaintiff for discovery misconduct by the Attorney General's office and the Board of Police Commissioners. The trial court granted summary judgment for the City, finding it was entitled to reimbursement. The appellate court reversed, holding that the legally significant date for a SLEF claim is when the suit or claim is filed, not when the underlying conduct occurred, and the City's claim was filed after the statutory deadline for reimbursement.","primaryTopic":"administrative-law","topicSlugs":["administrative-law","summary-judgment","civil-procedure","governmental-immunity","appellate-procedure"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=218777","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/city-of-st-louis-respondent-v-state-of-missouri-and-andrew-bailey-missour-112792","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: civil-procedure","topic: summary-judgment","topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"},{"caseId":"moappd:ed112349:2024-09-03","opinionId":"f361133b-fcdd-5272-b9f1-b4500e5a53f4","slug":"city-of-st-louis-respondent-and-joseph-brauer-and-chris-pappas-plaintiffs-112349","caseName":"City of St. Louis, Respondent, and Joseph Brauer and Chris Pappas, Plaintiffs, vs. State of Missouri, and Andrew Bailey, Missouri Attorney General, Appellants.","caseNumber":"ED112349","court":"moappd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District","decisionDate":"2024-09-03","year":2024,"display_summary":"The City of St. Louis sought reimbursement from the State Legal Expense Fund (SLEF) for a judgment it paid on behalf of a city police officer. The trial court granted summary judgment for the City, ruling it was entitled to reimbursement. The State appealed, arguing the claim was not authorized by statute. The appellate court reversed, holding that SLEF liability is triggered by the date a claim is filed, not the date of the underlying conduct, and the claim in question was filed after SLEF liability for City police officers had terminated.","primaryTopic":"administrative-law","topicSlugs":["administrative-law","governmental-immunity","civil-procedure","summary-judgment","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=211077","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/city-of-st-louis-respondent-and-joseph-brauer-and-chris-pappas-plaintiffs-112349","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: civil-procedure","topic: summary-judgment"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"appellant"}]}