Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Andrew Bailey, in his Official Capacity as Attorney General of Missouri, and Ken Zellers, in his Official Capacity as Commissioner of the Office of Administration Missouri Cases

This party appears in the Ott Law Firm Missouri court opinion archive. The cases below connect legal research paths to related practice pages when the opinions map to practical client issues.

Party ID
andrew-bailey-in-his-official-capacity-as-attorney-general-of-missouri-and-ken-zellers-in-his-official-capacity-as-commissioner-of-the-office-of-administration
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Family Law
Archive note: This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source. 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 Practice Pages

Practical guidance connected to this party profile

These links route party-name research from the court archive into Ott Law Firm practice pages when the associated opinions map to a practical client issue.

Legal Help From The Archive

Need help turning court research into a case plan?

If a party-profile research path points to a current injury, employment, insurance, or litigation issue, Ott Law Firm can review the facts and explain practical next steps.

Cases Involving Andrew Bailey, in his Official Capacity as Attorney General of Missouri, and Ken Zellers, in his Official Capacity as Commissioner of the Office of Administration

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

The Conservation Commission and Missouri Department of Conservation sought declaratory relief against the Attorney General and Commissioner of the Office of Administration after the General Assembly attempted to restrict the Commission's use of appropriated funds for land acquisition and payments in lieu of taxes (PILT). The circuit court ruled in favor of the Commission, finding the General Assembly lacked authority to limit the Commission's constitutional powers. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Article IV, sections 40-44 grant the Conservation Commission plenary authority to expend and use conservation funds for constitutionally enumerated purposes, and the General Assembly cannot interfere with this authority.