Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Feb 24, 2026
Kathryn Torre-Stewart appealed the dismissal of her claims against Washington University for disability discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under the Missouri Human Rights Act. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the disability discrimination and hostile work environment claims, finding Torre-Stewart failed to plead facts demonstrating a legal disability or sufficient harassment. However, the court reversed the dismissal of the retaliation claim, concluding that Torre-Stewart adequately pleaded facts to establish its elements, and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jan 13, 2026
EasyEx MO Ofallon, LLC appealed the circuit court's judgment denying its motion to set aside a default judgment entered against it in a suit brought by its former employee, Celestina Gamez, for violations of the Missouri Human Rights Act and Workers' Compensation Law. The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's decision, holding that EasyEx failed to file its motion to set aside the default judgment within the one-year time limit prescribed by Rule 74.05(d). The court also granted Gamez's motion for attorney's fees on appeal as a prevailing party under the MHRA and remanded the case for a determination of reasonable fees.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Dec 23, 2025
Karla Allsberry, a former circuit clerk, sued Judge Patrick Flynn and his secretary Kathy Hall for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and the Circuit Court of Lincoln County (CCLC) for sex discrimination and retaliation under the MHRA. The trial court granted summary judgment on defamation, directed verdicts on the MHRA claims, and a jury verdict for Flynn on IIED. The appellate court affirmed all judgments, finding no evidence of actual malice for defamation, that the State of Missouri (not CCLC) was Allsberry's employer for MHRA purposes, and that the jury instruction on IIED's "sole purpose" element was a correct statement of law. It also found Allsberry's claims of trial error regarding attorney misconduct were not preserved.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Nov 25, 2025
Victoria Amrine appealed the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission's decision denying her unemployment benefits, which stemmed from her termination by Progressive Casualty Insurance Company for failing to disclose a criminal charge. The appellate court did not reach the merits of Amrine's claims. Instead, the appeal was dismissed because Amrine's brief failed to substantially comply with Rule 84.04's mandatory briefing requirements, including an incomplete statement of facts, deficient points relied on, and an argument section lacking legal authority and record references. The court emphasized that pro se litigants are held to the same standards as attorneys.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Nov 25, 2025
Connie Haworth, a former employee, sued Guest Services, Inc., St. Anthony's, LLC, and Mark Ledom for various claims. The Appellants moved to compel arbitration, arguing a binding arbitration agreement existed, but the trial court denied their motions, finding a lack of mutual assent. The appellate court affirmed, deferring to the trial court's factual finding that the parties did not mutually assent to the arbitration agreement, and concluding that an adequate evidentiary hearing had been conducted.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Nov 4, 2025
Savannah Radmer appealed a judgment awarding her damages and attorney fees from her former employer, the Missouri Department of Corrections, on claims of gender discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation. She challenged the reduction of her damages award and the constitutionality of a damages cap. MDOC cross-appealed several issues, including jury instructions and punitive damages. The appellate court dismissed the consolidated appeals, concluding that the circuit court's judgment was not final due to its failure to rule on Radmer's requests for prejudgment interest and equitable relief.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Oct 21, 2025
Dana Miller, a former Chief Clerk of the Missouri House of Representatives, appealed the circuit court's dismissal of her whistleblower claim against the House. Miller alleged she was retaliated against by Speaker Dean Plocher after reporting concerns about software procurement, campaign finance violations, and abuse of authority. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, holding that Miller failed to allege facts showing Plocher was her "supervisor or appointing authority" as required by the whistleblower statute, as the Speaker lacks the authority to discipline or remove the Chief Clerk under House rules.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Oct 14, 2025
David Woody, an elected County Clerk and member of the Missouri National Guard, sued the County Commission after it limited his salary payment to 120 hours per federal fiscal year during his 400-day active federal military deployment. Woody argued he was entitled to full salary under § 41.942.1, while the Commission relied on § 105.270.1. The circuit court granted judgment on the pleadings for the Commission. The appellate court affirmed, holding that § 41.942.1 preserves a deployed Guard member's compensation rate and terms ("pay status"), but not the right to continued salary payment during extended federal deployment.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Oct 7, 2025
Hernandez Campbell sued Adecco USA, Inc., alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) related to employment background checks. The trial court granted summary judgment for Adecco on Campbell's disclosure and authorization claims. On appeal, Campbell raised four points, challenging the trial court's reliance on affidavits, the existence of a genuine issue of material fact regarding the provision of a consumer notification, the clarity and conspicuousness of the notification, and the dismissal with prejudice. The Western District affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in its rulings on the affidavits, Campbell's failure to properly support his factual assertions, and the merits-based disposition.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Sep 30, 2025
Samantha Bordas appealed the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission's decision to dismiss her application for unemployment benefits review as untimely. Bordas, who was terminated by FedEx Freight, Inc. due to absences, argued her absences were due to a hostile work environment. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Commission's decision that it lacked statutory authority to review the claim because Bordas's application for review was filed two months past the mandatory 30-day deadline.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Sep 2, 2025
Colin Rumpsa, a former deputy, sued the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department and others, alleging violations of the Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights (LEOBOR) during his termination process. The circuit court dismissed his petition, finding his claims were barred by the LEOBOR's one-year statute of limitations. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the limitations period begins when the violation itself is ascertainable, not when the resulting damage or final employment action is sustained.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Aug 26, 2025
Rayne Littlefield sued the Norman Rigdon Post 5896, Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), alleging sex discrimination and retaliation under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA). The circuit court granted summary judgment for VFW, finding it exempt from the MHRA as a bona fide private membership club. On appeal, Littlefield argued that VFW's public events and advertising negated its exempt status. The appellate court affirmed, holding as a matter of first impression that VFW's public activities do not, by themselves, alter its status as a bona fide private membership club, thus exempting it from MHRA liability.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Aug 19, 2025
Jennifer Kubinak, a 64-year-old woman, appealed the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Southeast Missouri State University on her claims of age discrimination, sex discrimination, and retaliation under the Missouri Human Rights Act. Kubinak alleged she was paid less than similarly situated male and younger employees and that the University retaliated against her after she filed a discrimination charge. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, finding that Kubinak failed to present admissible evidence or properly support her denials and additional facts as required by Rule 74.04(c)(2) to create a genuine issue of material fact for any of her claims.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Aug 19, 2025
Cassandra Murphy appealed the circuit court's judgment dismissing her lawsuit for sex discrimination and retaliation under the Missouri Human Rights Act for failure to prosecute. The circuit court had dismissed her case with prejudice after a period of perceived inactivity. The appellate court reversed, holding that the circuit court abused its discretion because Murphy's counsel had taken sufficient actions, including moving to remove the case from the dismissal docket, engaging in preliminary settlement negotiations, and attempting to schedule a deposition, to prevent a finding of substantial delay. The case was remanded with specific instructions to reinstate Murphy's case.
Supreme Court of Missouri / Aug 12, 2025
Kevin Rhodes, a former employee, and the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission both appealed the circuit court's judgment following a jury verdict in Rhodes's favor on his claims for hostile work environment and retaliation under the Missouri Human Rights Act. Rhodes challenged the constitutional validity of a damages cap, while the Commission argued Rhodes failed to make a submissible case. The Supreme Court of Missouri dismissed the appeal, holding that the circuit court's judgment was not final because it failed to rule on Rhodes's requests for equitable relief and prejudgment interest.
Supreme Court of Missouri / Aug 12, 2025
Catharine Sue Carter, as personal representative of David Carter's estate, and the Missouri Department of Corrections both appealed the circuit court's judgment following a jury verdict in Carter's favor on discrimination claims. Carter challenged the reduction of damages under a statutory cap, while the Department argued Carter failed to make a submissible case. The Supreme Court of Missouri dismissed the appeal, holding that the circuit court's judgment was not final because it failed to rule on Carter's requests for equitable relief and prejudgment interest.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jul 29, 2025
Lucas Wilkinson sued Farmers Holding Companies d/b/a Capital Sand, Inc. for violating Missouri's service letter statute after his employment was terminated. The trial court granted summary judgment for the employer. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the employer failed to meet its threshold burden for summary judgment by not properly pleading an affirmative defense as required by Rule 55.08, instead merely asserting facts in its motion.
Supreme Court of Missouri / Jul 22, 2025
In this original attorney disciplinary proceeding, the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel alleged attorney Ryan Christopher McCarty disclosed confidential client information after his termination from the Kansas City Police Department (KCPD), his former client. McCarty argued his disclosures were required or protected by the First Amendment and Missouri's whistleblowing statute. The Missouri Supreme Court found McCarty violated Rules 4-1.9(c)(1) and 4-1.9(c)(2) of the Rules of Professional Conduct, rejecting his defenses. The Court suspended McCarty's license to practice law indefinitely with no leave to apply for reinstatement for one year.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jul 15, 2025
Robert Wayne, a former police officer for Washington University, appealed the dismissal of his petition alleging the University violated his rights under Missouri's Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights (LEOBOR), section 590.502 RSMo. The trial court dismissed the petition, finding the LEOBOR does not apply to private universities. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the plain language of the LEOBOR limits its application to public entities, and that Wayne's petition failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Jul 8, 2025
Vendtech-SGI, LLC appealed the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission's decision to award David Benham unemployment benefits. Benham was discharged for allegedly conducting an unauthorized investigation and gossiping about a coworker's nude photograph. The Commission found that Vendtech did not meet its burden to prove misconduct, crediting Benham's testimony that he was merely verifying information before reporting it to supervisors and that his job duties were unclear. The appellate court affirmed the Commission's decision, finding it supported by competent and substantial evidence.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Jul 1, 2025
Rose Howland sued Truman Medical Center, alleging co-workers improperly accessed her patient records, discovered her COVID-19 vaccination status, and subsequently harassed and demoted her, forcing her resignation. The trial court dismissed most claims for lack of standing and a negligence per se claim for failure to state a claim. The appellate court reversed the dismissal of Howland's claims for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of implied contract, negligence, and negligent training and supervision, concluding she had sufficiently alleged standing. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of the negligence per se claim, holding that HIPAA and HITECH do not provide a private right of action. The case was remanded for further proceedings.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Jun 3, 2025
Savana Atkisson, a female corrections officer, sued the Missouri Department of Corrections (DOC) for sex discrimination and hostile work environment under the MHRA, alleging that a new gender announcement policy enabled offender sexual harassment. The trial court granted summary judgment to the DOC on both claims. On appeal, Atkisson challenged only the hostile work environment claim. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, finding that Atkisson failed to challenge an independent basis for the trial court's decision, specifically the finding that the DOC took appropriate remedial action in response to the alleged harassment.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District / May 28, 2025
Plaintiffs, members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 702, sued the City of Poplar Bluff for breach of a collective bargaining agreement. They claimed the City breached the agreement by not hiring Union member Quinton Tillman for a Water Plant Operator position, instead hiring Daniel Sparks. The trial court granted summary judgment for the City. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Sparks was an employee covered by the agreement and thus Tillman was not the only eligible internal applicant, negating the claim for job preference.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / May 6, 2025
True Manufacturing Co. appealed a decision by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission, which found Cedric A. Jackson was not disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. The Commission affirmed the Appeals Tribunal's determination that Jackson was not discharged for misconduct. The appellate court reversed, holding that the Commission erred by ruling the employer's hearsay evidence was incompetent despite no timely objection, thereby denying the employer a fair hearing and acting in excess of its powers.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Apr 29, 2025
Pedro Carrillo sued the Missouri Department of Corrections for disability discrimination and hostile work environment under the Missouri Human Rights Act. A jury found in favor of Carrillo on both claims, awarding a single sum for compensatory damages. The DOC appealed, challenging only the disability discrimination claim. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, reasoning that because the DOC did not challenge the hostile work environment claim, the single damage award remained supported regardless of any error in the disability discrimination claim. The court also remanded the case for the trial court to determine appellate attorney fees, expenses, and post-judgment interest for Carrillo.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Feb 25, 2025
Leon Thomas, Jr. appealed a decision by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission, which found he was overpaid unemployment benefits and ordered repayment because he failed to report vacation pay. On appeal, Thomas argued that the uncashed vacation pay check did not qualify as income, an argument the court noted was not raised below. The appellate court affirmed the Commission's decision, holding that "wages" for unemployment purposes include amounts "payable" for personal services, such as vacation pay, regardless of whether the claimant cashed the check.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Feb 11, 2025
Mike Abuhamdeh, a former sales representative, appealed the trial court's judgment regarding unpaid sales commissions from Carol House Furniture, Inc. Abuhamdeh argued the trial court erred by not imposing a mandatory statutory penalty under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA) for untimely commission payments. Carol House cross-appealed, asserting its compensation plan did not conflict with the MMPA regarding post-termination commissions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding that the Agreement conflicted with the MMPA, but reversed and remanded the case for the trial court to apply the statutory penalty for untimely payment of commissions.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District / Jan 31, 2025
Valhalla Restaurants, LLC d/b/a McDonald's appealed a decision by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission, which affirmed an award of unemployment benefits to former employee Kiara Page. The Commission found Page was not disqualified for misconduct, specifically rejecting claims of insubordination and an inappropriate relationship. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the Commission erred by failing to consider uncontroverted evidence of Page's chronic tardiness and absenteeism, which constituted misconduct under state law.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jan 21, 2025
Iria Hapsari H. Kline appealed the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission's decisions upholding the Division of Employment Security's finding that she was overpaid state and federal unemployment benefits. Kline argued she was improperly deprived of representation because her attorney did not receive the requisite notice of the hearing. The appellate court reversed the Commission's decisions, finding that the record lacked sufficient competent evidence to show that the Division had notified Kline's counsel of the hearing, and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jan 21, 2025
Appellant Patrick Carron sued Mark Schabbing and Darryl Green for tortious interference with a contract and business expectancy after his employment with Perry County Memorial Hospital was terminated. The trial court granted summary judgment for Schabbing and Green, finding they were released by a General Release and Waiver Carron signed as part of his separation agreement. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the Respondents were members of a "related company" to the Hospital, the Perryville Family Care Clinic, and thus were included in the scope of the release.