Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Galen suppes 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
galen-suppes
Cases Shown
2
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

Cases Involving Galen suppes

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Nov 17, 2020

Galen Suppes vs. The Curators of the University of Missouri, et al

Appellant

Galen Suppes appealed the dismissal with prejudice of his first amended petition against the Curators of the University of Missouri and other University-related defendants. Suppes's petition alleged breach of contract, abuse of process, civil conspiracy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, stemming from prior disputes over intellectual property, his employment termination, and campus access restrictions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that most claims were barred by res judicata due to prior litigation, others by attorney immunity or sovereign immunity, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend.