Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Date unavailable
Missouri Case Party
Kevin LaBranche 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
- kevin-labranche
- 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.
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 Kevin LaBranche
Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.
Appellant
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Date unavailable
Kevin LaBranche vs. Circuit Court of Jackson County
Kevin LaBranche appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the Circuit Court of Jackson County on his employment discrimination claims. LaBranche argued the trial court erred by denying his motion to strike factual assertions in the employer's statement of uncontroverted material facts that relied on an affidavit violating Rule 74.04(e). The appellate court reversed the summary judgment, finding the affidavit failed to meet the requirements of Rule 74.04(e) because it relied on business records not attached or served, and the affiant lacked sufficient personal knowledge. The case was remanded for further proceedings.