Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Felisha DeSpain 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
felisha-despain
Cases Shown
1
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

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 Felisha DeSpain

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Jun 17, 2025

Felisha DeSpain vs. Nathan DeSpain and Brandi Judah, Guardian ad litem; Rose C. Brisco

Appellant

Attorney Rose Briscoe appealed sanctions imposed by the circuit court in a dissolution of marriage case, stemming from her use of audio recordings made by the parties' son during sessions with the guardian ad litem (GAL) and a court-appointed therapist. The circuit court had found that Briscoe violated attorney-client privilege, work product protection, and therapist-patient privilege. The appellate court reversed the sanctions, holding that none of these privileges or protections applied to the communications at issue. The case was remanded for the circuit court to reconsider whether sanctions were warranted on other grounds, independent of privilege claims.