Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

The Missouri State Highway Patrol and Eric T. Olson 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
the-missouri-state-highway-patrol-and-eric-t-olson
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 The Missouri State Highway Patrol and Eric T. Olson

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Aug 20, 2019

Anthony Piercy vs. The Missouri State Highway Patrol and Eric T. Olson

Respondent

Anthony Piercy, a Missouri State Highway Patrol Trooper, was terminated by the Superintendent despite the Disciplinary Review Board recommending a lesser punishment. Piercy sought judicial review, and the circuit court found the Superintendent lacked statutory authority to impose a harsher punishment than recommended, remanding the case. The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's judgment, holding that under Section 43.150, the Superintendent's authority to dismiss is limited to instances where dismissal is recommended by the Board. The court also determined the case was not moot and was a contested case for judicial review purposes.