Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Orkin LLC and Danny Biron 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
orkin-llc-and-danny-biron
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Orkin LLC and Danny Biron

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Dec 26, 2018

Gary Gentry vs. Orkin LLC and Danny Biron

Respondent

Gary Gentry sued Orkin, LLC and Danny Biron for retaliation under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA), alleging they failed to interview or rehire him after he filed a discrimination complaint. A jury found in Gentry's favor, awarding compensatory and punitive damages. On appeal, Orkin and Biron raised seven claims of error, including instructional errors, refusal of a business judgment instruction, and pleading deficiencies. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment on the merits and remanded the case for a determination of appellate attorneys' fees.