Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

State ex rel. Sedrick Phillip-Smith, Relator 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
state-ex-rel-sedrick-phillipsmith-relator
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Civil Litigation
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 State ex rel. Sedrick Phillip-Smith, Relator

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Sedrick Phillip-Smith sought a writ of prohibition to prevent the circuit court from enforcing its order that found service of process valid in a personal injury case. The circuit court had overruled Phillip-Smith's motion to quash service, which was attempted by leaving the summons with an HR representative at his workplace. The appellate court made the preliminary writ permanent, holding that service was facially deficient because the HR representative lacked actual or apparent authority to accept service, thus preventing the circuit court from acquiring personal jurisdiction.