Missouri Court of Appeals, 1996

Klipsch v. Lohman

Missouri Court of Appeals · Decided October 8, 1996 · Dowd, Gaertner, Reinhard

931 S.W.2d 197; 1996 Mo. App. LEXIS 1647; 1996 WL 571159 (South Western Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

Sooch v. Director of Revenue (Mo. Ct. App. 2003)
Patrick v. Director of Revenue (Mo. Ct. App. 1997)
Kuhlman v. Director of Revenue (Mo. Ct. App. 1997)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner appeals from the circuit court’s judgment sustaining the Director’s suspension of petitioner’s driving privileges. We remand.

Petitioner’s driving privileges were suspended as a result of allegedly driving with a blood-alcohol content by weight of .10% or more, § 302.505.1, RSMo 1994.1 The suspension was sustained after an administrative hearing, §§ 302.505.2, 302.530, and she petitioned for a trial de novo, § 302.535. The circuit court assigned the case to a traffic court commissioner. The commissioner heard the case and found that the suspension should be affirmed. The findings and recommendations of the commissioner were adopted and confirmed by an associate circuit judge.

The instant case is controlled by the decision in Chamberlain v. Director of Revenue, 921 S.W.2d 138 (Mo.App. E.D. 1996). See also State ex rel. Coyle v. O’Toole, 914 S.W.2d 871 (Mo.App. E.D. 1996). In Chamberlain, we found that an order entered after a trial de novo heard by a traffic commissioner was without legal effect and that the petition remained in the circuit court. Chamberlain, 921 S.W.2d at 139.

We remand.

. All statutory references are to RSMo 1994.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.