Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Orders Pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and/or 84.16(b)

Decision date: UnknownWD68866

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.

Related Legal Help

Researching a similar insurance bad faith issue?

This archive page is for legal research. For a practical overview of claims, deadlines, evidence, and next steps, start with the related practice page.

Opinion

OF FEBRUARY 24, 2009 WESTERN DISTRICT

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b) AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

WD68866 Mark Karscig vs. Jennifer M. McConville; and American Family Mutual Insurance Company WD68967 Consolidated with WD68866 WD69209 Consolidated with WD68866 WD69231 Michael Pursifull vs. Braun Plastering Company, Inc. and Treasurer of The State of Missouri WD69287 Ricky Lee Higgins vs. State of Missouri WD69315 Joseph Armato and Pamela D. Armato vs. 1100 Services, LLC. WD69485 Matthew J. King vs. State of Missouri WD69639 Larry D. Neeley vs. State of Missouri WD69796 Alex J. Casson vs. Larry Crawford, et al. ------------------------------------------------------------------

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25 (b) AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

WD68838 State of Missouri vs. Steven Robert McCann WD69050 State of Missouri vs. Vincent L. Bell -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authorities Cited

Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.

Rules

Related Opinions

Other opinions in the same practice area.

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.

Injured in a similar issue?

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

Read The Medical Malpractice GuideGuide
Personal Injurymajority12,101 words
Read opinion