St. Louis Counsel
Ott Law Firm

Case Authority

state ex rel city of kansas city v harrell 575 sw3d 489

This authority appears in 8 citation records in the Ott Law Firm Missouri court opinion archive.

Canonical ID
case:state-ex-rel-city-of-kansas-city-v-harrell-575-sw3d-489
Citation Sample
State ex rel. City of Kansas City v. Harrell, 575 S.W.3d 489
Cases Shown
8
Archive note: 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source. This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Related Practice Pages

Practical guidance connected to cases citing this authority

These links route legal-research traffic from this authority profile into Ott Law Firm practice pages when the authority itself or the cited cases map to a practical client issue.

Personal InjuryCivil LitigationCorporate LawEmployment LawCriminal LawInsurance Bad Faith

Legal Help From The Archive

Need help with an issue tied to state ex rel city of kansas city v harrell 575 sw3d 489?

This authority profile is public case-law research. If the authority connects to your claim or dispute, Ott Law Firm can help evaluate evidence, deadlines, and next steps.

Free ConsultationCall Ott Law Firm

Citation Treatment

cited

8

Cases Citing state ex rel city of kansas city v harrell 575 sw3d 489

Showing up to 50 opinion records linked to this authority.

cited

Citation: State ex rel. City of Kansas City v. Harrell, 575 S.W.3d 489

The court reversed the circuit court's grant of sovereign immunity dismissal, finding that plaintiffs' common-law claims against the hospital board could proceed. However, the court affirmed dismissal of statutory claims for computer tampering and identity theft, and remanded the case for further proceedings on the remaining claims.

Medical MalpracticePersonal Injury