Hermann v. Missouri State Public Defender System

463 S.W.3d 797, 2015 WL 574813
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided February 10, 2015·No. No. ED 101046·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Cynthia Hermann (Appellant) appeals from the trial court’s judgment granting the Missouri State Public Defender System’s, Cathy Kelly’s, and Mary Fox’s (collectively Respondents) Motion for Directed ■Verdict on Appellant’s retaliation claim in her Petition alleging employment discrimination under the Missouri Human Rights Act. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court did not err in granting Respondents’ Motion. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We [798] have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hermann v. Missouri State Public Defender System, 463 S.W.3d 797, 2015 WL 574813 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

463 S.W.3d 797 (Hermann v. Missouri State Public Defender System) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.