Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Missouri Department of Corrections, Respondent- 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-department-of-corrections-respondent
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Department of Corrections, Respondent-

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Catharine Sue Carter, as personal representative of David Carter's estate, and the Missouri Department of Corrections both appealed the circuit court's judgment following a jury verdict in Carter's favor on discrimination claims. Carter challenged the reduction of damages under a statutory cap, while the Department argued Carter failed to make a submissible case. The Supreme Court of Missouri dismissed the appeal, holding that the circuit court's judgment was not final because it failed to rule on Carter's requests for equitable relief and prejudgment interest.