Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Director of Revenue, Appellant, v. Patricia Thompson, Respondent.

Decision date: Unknown

Parties & Roles

Disposition

Mixed outcome

  • {"type":"reversed","scope":null}
  • {"type":"remanded","scope":null}

Slip Opinion Notice

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.

Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court. Opinion Missouri Court of Appeals Western District Case Style: Director of Revenue, Appellant, v. Patricia Thompson, Respondent. Case Number: 54322 Handdown Date: 02/10/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of Miller County, Hon. James A. Grantham Counsel for Appellant: Barry Gilbert Counsel for Respondent: Timothy R. Cisar Opinion Summary: The Director of Revenue appeals a judgment setting aside the suspension of respondent Patricia Thompson's driver's license on the grounds that the State failed to meet its burden of proof. REMANDED. The Court of Appeals has no basis for deciding an appeal where the trial court did not record the proceedings and no transcript of the trial is available. Citation: Opinion Author: Albert A. Riederer, Judge Opinion Vote: REMANDED. Stith, P.J., and Hanna, J., concur. Opinion: Respondent Patricia Thompson, while driving her own car, was involved in an automobile accident on April 20, 1994, and the accident was later reported to Appellant by a third party. Appellant sent Respondent a Notice of Suspension on June 22, 1995, for failure to maintain financial responsibility as required by Section 302.025 RSMo, and Respondent requested an administrative hearing to contest the suspension. The hearing was held September 7, 1995, and Appellant entered a decision October 12, 1995, upholding the suspension. Respondent filed a Petition for Trial De Novo in the Circuit Court of Miller County. The trial court held a hearing

March 27, 1997, and sustained the Respondent's petition, setting aside the suspension because the State failed to meet its burden of proof. This appeal followed. However, the trial court did not record the proceedings, and no transcript of the trial is available for this appeal. Appellant argues that the case should be reversed, because Respondent is "strictly liable" under Section 302.025. In the alternative, Appellant argues that the case should be remanded because of a failure to preserve a record of the proceeding as required by Section 512.180. It is not clear from the record if during the circuit court proceeding either party presented evidence in addition to the administrative record. Furthermore, it is not clear from the record if the administrative record constituted the sole basis for the circuit court's judgement. Therefore, we are unable to decide this appeal. The case is remanded for a new trial so an adequate record may be produced. Kellison v. Director of Revenue, 907 S.W.2d 192 (Mo. App. 1995). All concur. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.

Authorities Cited

Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.

Statutes

Cases

Related Opinions

Other opinions in the same practice area.

Christopher Hanshaw, Appellant, vs. Crown Equipment Corp., et al., Respondents.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriFebruary 24, 2026#SC101091

affirmed

The court affirmed the circuit court's decision to exclude Hanshaw's expert witness testimony and grant summary judgment to Crown Equipment in a product liability case involving an allegedly defectively designed forklift. The expert's opinions were properly excluded because they were not supported by reliable methodology, as the expert performed no tests and failed to demonstrate how cited research and data supported his conclusions.

Injured in a similar issue?

Call now or send the claim details with this opinion context preserved.

Read The Personal Injury GuideGuide
Civil Litigationmajority2,703 words
Read opinion
remanded

The court affirmed the directed verdict as to four counts against Norman based on agency but vacated and remanded the defamation counts against Kaminsky and one count against Norman, finding that the circuit court erred in requiring independent evidence of reputational damage beyond the plaintiff's own testimony when the evidence of harm was substantial and directly resulted from the defendants' statements.

per_curiam4,488 words
Read opinion

Appellants sought damages for a wrongful death resulting from a motor vehicle collision involving a pursued driver, alleging the Missouri State Highway Patrol's pursuit was negligent and proximately caused the collision. The court affirmed summary judgment for MSHP, finding that Appellants failed to produce sufficient facts demonstrating that MSHP's actions were the proximate cause of the collision, which is a necessary element of their case.

Injured in a similar issue?

Call now or send the claim details with this opinion context preserved.

Read The Car Accidents GuideGuide
Personal InjuryWrongful Deathper_curiam3,654 words
Read opinion