Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Interstate Brands Corporation 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
interstate-brands-corporation
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Workers' Compensation
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Interstate Brands Corporation

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Oct 8, 2019

Dale Nivens vs. Interstate Brands Corporation

Respondent

Dale Nivens, an employee, filed a workers' compensation claim and a claim against the Second Injury Fund, alleging permanent total disability from a knee injury combined with preexisting conditions. The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed an Administrative Law Judge's award finding Nivens permanently and totally disabled, with the Fund liable. On appeal, the Fund challenged the Commission's invocation of the Rule of Necessity and the sufficiency of evidence for permanent total disability. The appellate court affirmed the Commission's award, finding no error in the application of the Rule of Necessity or the determination of permanent total disability.