Legal Opinion

Laut v. City of Arnold

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 3, 2013No. ED 99424PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Introduction

GARY M. GAERTNER, Jr., Judge.

Rachel Laut (Laut) and John Soellner (Soellner) (collectively referred to as Appellants) appeal the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of the City of Arnold (City), on Appellants’ petition seeking disclosure of documents under Missouri’s Sunshine Law, Chapter 610, RSMo. (Supp. 2012).1 We find that the trial court did not have a sufficient record from which to grant summary judgment regarding all of the documents Appellants requested. We also find a genuine factual dispute exists regarding whether an Internal Affairs report prepared by the City…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1993
  2. Samantar v. YousufSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  3. Spradlin v. City of FultonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1998
  4. Bethel v. Sunlight Janitor ServiceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1977
  5. Guyer v. City of KirkwoodSupreme Court of Missouri · 2001

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Rachal Laut, f/k/a Rachal Govro, and John M. Soellner v. City of ArnoldSupreme Court of Missouri · 2016
  2. Chasnoff v. MokwaMissouri Court of Appeals · 2015
  3. Farber v. Metro. Police Dep't of St. LouisMissouri Court of Appeals · 2018
  4. Baker v. HaydenCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2020
  5. City of Byrnes Mill, Missouri v. Craig LimesandMissouri Court of Appeals · 2020

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API