Plaintiff appealed the adverse judgment on his disability discrimination and retaliation claims alleging that he was wrongfully discharged due to his disability and in retaliation for his whistleblowing. During jury instructions, the trial court ruled that it was legally bound to use the model business judgment instruction. On appeal, plaintiff argued that the model instruction failed to reflect the intended meaning of the related statute and accordingly confused and misdirected the jury.
Where court rules required use of applicable model instructions, the trial court did not err in relying on the model instruction that was applicable to plaintiff’s Missouri Human Rights Act claims.
Judgment is affirmed.
Crisp v. Missouri School for the Death (MLW No. 80679/Case No. WD85660– 24 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, Sutton, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Boone County, Harris, J.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently provided important information about how it plans to handle the surge in data-driven False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam lawsuits. On April 30, 2026, DOJ announc...