OTT LAW

Tom Edward Persons, Plaintiff/Appellant, Director of Revenue, State of Missouri, Defendant/Respondent.

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 Eastern District Case Style: Tom Edward Persons, Plaintiff/Appellant, Director of Revenue, State of Missouri, Defendant/Respondent. Case Number: 72764 Handdown Date: 05/19/1998 Appeal From: Circuit Court of Marion County, Hon. John J. Jackson Counsel for Appellant: Stephen Ray Porter Counsel for Respondent: Evan J. Buchheim Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Grimm, P.J., Pudlowski and Gaertner, J.J., concur Opinion: ORDER The Director of Revenue revoked driver's license for one year for refusing to submit to a blood alcohol test. Driver filed a petition, and the trial court conducted a hearing. See section 577.041.4, RSMo 1994. Following the hearing, the trial court denied the petition and affirmed the revocation. Driver appeals. In his sole point, he contends that there was no evidence that he "was physically driving or operating a motor vehicle" as required by section 577.001.1 and 577.020, RSMo Cum Supp. 1996. We disagree and affirm. Although there was no direct evidence that anyone saw driver "physically driving or operating" his vehicle, sufficient circumstantial evidence was presented which supports the trial court's judgment. A witness came upon driver's vehicle; it was in a ditch. The witness saw driver exit the vehicle through the driver's door. No one else was around

except driver and the witness. Driver had blood on his face, yet later told the arresting officer that he was not involved in the accident. We have studied the briefs, legal file, and transcript. No error of law appears and no jurisprudential purpose would be served by an extended opinion. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.

Related Opinions

AIG Agency, Inc., d/b/a Associated Insurance Group, Appellant, vs. Missouri General Insurance Agency, Inc., Jim Baxendale and Mitch O'Brien, Respondents.(2015)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictNovember 3, 3015#ED102096

affirmed
personal-injurymajority3,747 words

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.

personal-injurymajority2,703 words

Mouna Apperson, f/k/a Nicholas Apperson, Appellant, vs. Natasha Kaminsky, et al., Respondents.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriJanuary 23, 2026#SC101020

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.

personal-injuryper_curiam4,488 words

K.A.C. by and through, ASHLEY ACOSTA, NEXT FRIEND, and MICHAEL CRITES, JR., Appellants v. MISSOURI STATE HIGHWAY PATROL, ET AL., Respondents(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictJanuary 12, 2026#SD38943

affirmed

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.

personal-injuryper_curiam3,654 words

Mark and Sherry Davis, and David and Denise Kamm; Kevin Laughlin vs. City of Kearney, Missouri(2025)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western DistrictDecember 16, 2025#WD87389

affirmed
personal-injurymajority7,717 words