Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

SCOTT J. BRICK, D.O., and LAKE REGIONAL HEALTH SYSTEM, Relators 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
scott-j-brick-do-and-lake-regional-health-system-relators
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Personal Injury
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 SCOTT J. BRICK, D.O., and LAKE REGIONAL HEALTH SYSTEM, Relators

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Relators Dr. Scott J. Brick and Lake Regional Health System sought a permanent writ of mandamus to compel Respondent Judge Aaron Koeppen to dismiss Wanda Hannon's medical malpractice suit against them. Relators argued Hannon failed to serve them within the 180-day limit prescribed by section 516.105.2, while Respondent contended the statute conflicted with Missouri Supreme Court Rule 54. The appellate court found no conflict between the statute and Rule 54, holding that the statute's specific deadline for service in medical malpractice cases complements Rule 54's general requirement for prompt service. Consequently, the court made its preliminary writ of mandamus permanent, ordering Respondent to dismiss Hannon's petition with prejudice.