Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Appellant, Alisa Warren, Appellant, and Armstrong Teasdale, LLP 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
missouri-commission-on-human-rights-appellant-alisa-warren-appellant-and-armstrong-teasdale-llp
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

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 Missouri Commission on Human Rights, Appellant, Alisa Warren, Appellant, and Armstrong Teasdale, LLP

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Jim Swoboda filed a discrimination charge against the Law Firm with the Missouri Commission on Human Rights, which dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction. Swoboda sought judicial review, and the circuit court issued a permanent writ of mandamus directing the Commission to accept and investigate the charge. The Missouri Supreme Court reversed, holding that Swoboda failed to establish a clear, unequivocal, specific right to mandamus relief because the question of whether the Missouri Human Rights Act requires an employment relationship for such claims was an issue of first impression.