Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Office of Public Counsel 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
office-of-public-counsel
Cases Shown
7
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

Cases Involving Office of Public Counsel

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

The Office of Public Counsel appealed an order from the Public Service Commission that granted Missouri-American Water Company and DCM Land, LLC, variances from the Water Company's tariff provisions regarding water main extensions. The variances would have shifted cost responsibility from the developer, DCM, to the Water Company. The Missouri Supreme Court reversed the Commission's order, holding that the Commission lacked statutory authority to grant such variances because the tariff itself did not contain explicit language allowing for exceptions or departures from its rules. The case was remanded for the Commission to enter an order consistent with the opinion.

Missouri-American Water Company and DCM Land, LLC, jointly applied to the Public Service Commission for variances from the Water Company's tariff provisions concerning water main extensions. The Office of Public Counsel opposed the variances, arguing the Commission lacked authority, good cause was absent, and the variances were unduly discriminatory. The Commission granted the variances, and Public Counsel appealed. The appellate court affirmed the Commission's order, holding that the Commission had statutory authority to grant tariff variances, good cause existed for the specific variances, and the variances were not unduly discriminatory.