Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Cole County, Missouri 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
cole-county-missouri
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Employment 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Cole County, Missouri

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Date unavailable

David Barrett vs. Cole County, Missouri

Respondent

David Barrett, a former Deputy Sheriff, sued Cole County for employment discrimination and retaliation under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA) and sought judicial review of his termination. The trial court dismissed all claims for failure to state a claim. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of Barrett's claims for judicial review, finding he lacked a property or liberty interest as an at-will employee without public disclosure of stigmatizing information. However, the court reversed the dismissal of Barrett's MHRA claims, concluding that his amended petition sufficiently pleaded facts for race/color discrimination, perceived race/color discrimination, retaliation, and associational discrimination. The case was remanded for further proceedings on the MHRA claims.