Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Michelle Peterman 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
michelle-peterman
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Civil Litigation
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Michelle Peterman

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / May 21, 2019

Michelle Peterman, Appellant, v. Director of Revenue, State of Missouri, Respondent.

Appellant

Michelle Peterman appealed the circuit court's judgment upholding the Director of Revenue's decision to deny her driving privileges for five years and revoke her license for one year due to two driving while intoxicated (DWI) convictions. Peterman argued that the Director's certified Driving Record was insufficient to prove the underlying convictions without an original judgment of conviction. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that the Driving Record, which provided specific details of the convictions, was sufficient evidence to meet the Director's burden for both the point-based revocation and the five-year denial of privileges.