OTT LAW

Donald Steven Moore, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Jeanette Lohman, Director of Missouri Department of Revenue, Respondent/Appellant.

Decision date: Unknown

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 Southern District Case Style: Donald Steven Moore, Petitioner/Respondent, v. Jeanette Lohman, Director of Missouri Department of Revenue, Respondent/Appellant. Case Number: 21750 Handdown Date: 02/19/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of Pemiscot County, Hon.Fred W. Copeland Counsel for Appellant: Evan J. Buchheim Counsel for Respondent: No appearance Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: James K. Prewitt, Judge Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Garrison, P.J., and Crow, J., concur. Opinion: The trial court set aside Appellant's decision to revoke Respondent's driver's license for one year for failure to take a breathalyzer test. Appellant presents one point, stating: The trial court's decision to set aside the revocation of Respondent's driving privilege because the state failed to prove that the arresting officer issued a temporary permit and notice form, Form 4323, to Respondent is error in that (A) Respondent was not prejudiced because Respondent did receive notice of the revocation and timely appealed, and (B) proof that the arresting officer issued Form 4323 to Respondent is not required to sustain a revocation for refusal to submit to the breathalyzer. The point and Appellant's brief ignore the finding of the trial court that the arresting officer also "failed to give Petitioner notice that his license would be immediately revoked upon his refusal" to take the breathalyzer test. Petitioner denied that he was so informed. The arresting officer, although apparently told to do so, did not appear in court. This finding alone justified the trial court's action.

Section 577.041.1, RSMo 1994 (since amended, see RSMo Supp. 1997), requires in part that the driver be informed "that his license shall be immediately revoked upon his refusal to take the test." Failure to inform the driver of all the consequences of refusal to take a chemical test to measure blood-alcohol content prevents the Director of Revenue from revoking his driver's license based upon the refusal. Cates v. Director of Revenue, 943 S.W.2d 281, 283 (Mo.App. 1997); Kladky v. Director of Revenue, 940 S.W.2d 34, 35 (Mo.App. 1997). There was a sufficient basis for the trial court's ruling based upon the failure to properly notify Respondent of the consequence of the failure to take the test. The judgment is affirmed. Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.

Related Opinions

In re: Brian Todd Goldstein, Respondent.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriJanuary 23, 2026#SC101182

dismissed

The Missouri Supreme Court found that attorney Brian Todd Goldstein violated professional conduct rules by mishandling client funds and engaging in dishonest conduct, including taking clients without informing his law firm, misrepresenting trust account practices, and misappropriating over $585,000 from more than 100 clients. The Court ordered Goldstein disbarred based on violations of rules governing safekeeping of property and dishonest conduct.

administrativeper_curiam2,484 words

In re: Mark W. Arensberg, Respondent.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriJanuary 13, 2026#SC101157

modified

Attorney Arensberg was disciplined for knowingly drafting fraudulent loan documents to diminish a client's son's marital estate during divorce proceedings. Rather than the agreed-upon reprimand, the court imposed an indefinite suspension with a six-month waiting period for reinstatement, stayed pending successful completion of one-year probation.

administrativeper_curiam3,367 words

Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services vs. Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region(2025)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictSeptember 16, 2025#WD87223

affirmed
administrativemajority10,025 words

Motors Insurance Corporation vs. Autobot Towing, LLC(2025)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictJuly 8, 2025#WD87590

affirmed
administrativemajority4,043 words

JAMES SANCHEZ, in his capacity as President of INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL UNION 702, KEITH ATCHISON, in his capacity as Vice-President of INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL UNION 702, and QUINTON TILLMAN, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. CITY OF POPLAR BLUFF, MISSOURI, Defendant-Respondent(2025)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictMay 28, 2025#SD38656

affirmed
administrativemajority2,960 words