Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

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

Decision date: UnknownWD73666

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 criminal law 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

AUGUST 28, 2012 WESTERN DISTRICT

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b) AND ISSUED PER CURIAM --------------------------------------------------------------------------- WD73666 Michael Stephenson vs. State of Missouri WD73967 Cody Ward vs. State of Missouri WD74009 James D. Baldwin vs. State of Missouri WD74231 Michael Lynn Beattie vs. Chris Koster WD74395 Shannon L. Bair vs. William M. Faust WD74529 Kimberly Ann Willis vs. Donald J. Willis WD74559 Transport Leasing/Contract, Inc. vs. Clarence Rhodes and Division of Employment Security WD74713 In the Interest of: A.B., A.B., A.B., M.B., & A.M.; M.B. (Natural Mother) vs. Juvenile Officer

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b) AND ISSUED PER CURIAM --------------------------------------------------------------------------- WD74015 State of Missouri vs. Bobby Aaron Davis WD74017 State of Missouri vs. Randy Joe Fisher WD74052 State of Missouri vs. Jaron A. Bradley WD74286 State of Missouri vs. Sean A. Price

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