Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Harold Lampley and Rene Frost v. The Missouri Commission on Human Rights and Alisa Warren

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided February 26, 2019No. SC96828Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

OPINION CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART

Zel M. Fischer, Chief Justice

I concur with the opinions of Judges Draper, Wilson, and Powell to the extent they hold the administrative action is properly reviewed as a noncontested case,1 and that discrimination based on sexual orientation is not covered by the Missouri Human Rights Act. Lampley v. Mo. Comm'n on Human Rights , Slip Op. at 13; see also R.M.A., by h is next friend: Rachelle Appleberry v. Blue Springs R-IV Sch. Dist. , 568 S.W.3d 420, 433-34, 2019 WL 925511 (Mo. banc 2019).2 I also agree Lampley and Frost failed to comply with…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Furlong Companies v. City of Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 2006
  2. Farrow v. Saint Francis Medical CenterSupreme Court of Missouri · 2013
  3. R.M.A. (a Minor Child), by his Next Friend: Rachelle Appleberry v. Blue Springs R-IV School District and Blue Springs School District Board of EducationSupreme Court of Missouri · 2019
  4. United States Department of Veterans Affairs v. BoresiSupreme Court of Missouri · 2013
  5. Newsome v. Kansas City, Missouri School DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 2017

12 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