St. Louis Counsel
Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Joseph Weixeldorfer 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
joseph-weixeldorfer
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Corporate 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

Corporate 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 ConsultationCall Ott Law Firm

Cases Involving Joseph Weixeldorfer

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

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

Joseph Weixeldorfer vs. City of Kansas City, Missouri, et al.

Appellant

Joseph Weixeldorfer, a former employee of the Kansas City Fire Department, sued the City of Kansas City, Missouri, alleging unauthorized disclosure of medical information, negligence, and breach of contract. The trial court granted summary judgment for the City and denied Weixeldorfer's motion for leave to file a Fifth Amended Petition. The appellate court affirmed, finding no abuse of discretion in denying the amendments because the proposed new parties were time-barred and lacked proper notice, and the new legal theories for sovereign immunity and breach of contract lacked merit or were untimely raised.

Corporate LawCivil Litigation