Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

City of St. Peters 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
city-of-st-peters
Cases Shown
5
Top Practice Route
Criminal 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

Cases Involving City of St. Peters

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Oct 25, 2022

City of St. Peters, Appellant, vs. Collene Velma Lienemann, Respondent.

Appellant

The City of St. Peters appealed the trial court's dismissal of 31 municipal ordinance violation citations against Collene Velma Lienemann for property maintenance and nuisance issues. The appellate court first determined that while the City's initial notices of appeal were untimely, it properly exercised its discretion to allow a late filing. The court then reversed the dismissal, holding that further factual determinations were needed to establish Lienemann's liability as a proper defendant under the City's ordinances, which depend on her level of "control" or "responsibility" for the property. Finally, the court denied the City's argument that collateral estoppel applied, as it is generally unavailable to the State in quasi-criminal municipal proceedings.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Mar 1, 2022

Amanda Gill, Appellant, v. City of St. Peters, Respondent.

Respondent

Amanda Gill appealed the circuit court's dismissal of Count II of her petition, which alleged sex discrimination under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA) based on a disparate impact theory. The circuit court dismissed the claim, finding it time-barred and that Missouri courts do not recognize a disparate impact claim under the MHRA. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, holding that Gill's claim was time-barred as her transfer was a discrete act not subject to the continuing violation theory, and that the Lilly Ledbetter Act does not extend MHRA filing periods. The court further held that Missouri courts have not recognized a disparate impact claim under the MHRA, and Gill failed to plead facts to support such a claim.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Feb 11, 2020

Patricia Watson, Appellant, vs. City of St. Peters, Respondent.

Respondent

Patricia Watson sued the City of St. Peters for negligence after she was injured when her bicycle wheel entered a storm water sump inlet extending into a sidewalk. The jury found for the City, and the trial court entered judgment accordingly. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding evidence of the City's pre-accident citywide program to address sump inlet conditions. This evidence was not excludable as a subsequent remedial measure and was material to proving the City's knowledge of the dangerous condition.