Skip to content
St. Louis Counsel
Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

James F. Green 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
james-f-green
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

Employment LawCivil Litigation

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.

Free Employment ConsultationCall About A Employment Claim

Cases Involving James F. Green

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Aug 30, 2022

James F. Green vs. Division of Employment Security

Appellant

James F. Green appealed the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission's decision, which affirmed his disqualification from unemployment benefits for voluntarily quitting his employment. The appellate court dismissed Green's appeal. This dismissal was due to Green's numerous and extensive violations of appellate briefing rules, specifically Rule 84.04, which prevented the court from competently reviewing the merits of his arguments.

Employment LawCivil Litigation