State ex rel. Gardner v. Stelzer

Decision Date13 February 2019
Docket NumberNo. ED 107482,ED 107482
Citation568 S.W.3d 48
Parties STATE of Missouri, EX REL., Kimberly M. GARDNER, Circuit Attorney of the City of St. Louis, Relator, v. Honorable Michael F. STELZER, Circuit Judge, Division Six, Twenty-Second Circuit, Respondent.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

568 S.W.3d 48

STATE of Missouri, EX REL., Kimberly M. GARDNER, Circuit Attorney of the City of St. Louis, Relator,
v.
Honorable Michael F. STELZER, Circuit Judge, Division Six, Twenty-Second Circuit, Respondent.

No. ED 107482

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, WRIT DIVISION FOUR.

FILED: February 13, 2019


ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT(s): Catherine Ann Dierker, 6250 Westminster Place, St. Louis, MO 63130.

ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT(s): Melissa Nicole Moody atty for John Doe, 5205 Hampton Ave., St. Louis, MO 63109, Neil J. Bruntrager atty for St. Louis Police Department, 225 S. Meramec Ave., Suite 1200, Clayton, MO 63015, BRUNTRAGER & BILLINGS PC.

Sherri B. Sullivan, Judge and Lisa P. Page, Chief Judge: Concur

OPINION

Honorable Mary K. Hoff

Relator, Kimberly M. Gardner, Circuit Attorney of the City of St. Louis (Circuit Attorney) seeks a Writ of Prohibition to prevent Respondent, the Honorable Michael F. Stelzer (Respondent or Judge Stelzer) from enforcing his order of December 18, 2018, denying Circuit Attorney’s Motion to Quash Subpoena of Chris Hinckley, Chief Warrant Officer for the Circuit Attorney Office (Hinckley), and denying Circuit Attorney’s Motion to Dismiss St. Louis Metropolitan Police Officer John Doe’s (John Doe) underlying Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Permanent Injunction (TRO Motion).

Circuit Attorney also filed Suggestions in Support of Writ of Prohibition, Exhibits, and Motions to Seal Exhibits. This court issued a Preliminary Order in Prohibition and sealed the exhibits. Respondent filed a Combined Motion to Dismiss and Suggestions in Opposition and Exhibits.1 We dispense with further briefing as permitted by Rule 84.24(i). We make the Preliminary Order in Prohibition permanent.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On September 4, 2018, John Doe filed a TRO Motion against Circuit Attorney and the St. Louis Police Department alleging

568 S.W.3d 50

that on August 28, 2018, he and several other officers of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department were placed on an "exclusion list" by Circuit Attorney without explanation and alleged this was detrimental to his job, reputation, and promotion. John Doe filed a (TRO Motion) prohibiting the dissemination of this "exclusion list" to the public and demanded that the Circuit Attorney be required to indicate the reasoning and procedures established for inclusion on this list.

On September 5, 2018, Circuit Attorney filed a Motion to Dismiss this action based on the insufficiency of the TRO Motion, alleging that the TRO Motion failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because John Doe failed to state a cognizable claim. Both the TRO Motion and Circuit Attorney’s Motion to Dismiss were heard on September 6, 2018, by Judge Stelzer without a record.

On September 6, 2018, Judge Stelzer issued an order granting the TRO Motion, which prohibited the voluntary dissemination of the exclusion list, and denied Circuit Attorney’s Motion to Dismiss.

On October 4, 2018, Circuit Attorney filed a Consent Memorandum, consenting to a permanent order and agreeing to keep confidential and refrain from disseminating the exclusion list. Neither the September 6, 2018, order granting the TRO Motion nor the October 4, 2018, consent memorandum addressed John Doe’s request for an order mandating Circuit Attorney to provide the reasons or procedures for the placement of officers' names onto the exclusion list.

On December 6, 2018, Hinckley was served with a subpoena to appear for deposition regarding the exclusion list. On December 7, 2018, Circuit Attorney filed objections and a Motion to Quash Subpoena based on work product, privilege grounds, and infringement of her discretion and authority as elected circuit attorney. On December 18, 2018, Judge Stelzer summarily denied this Motion to Quash after hearing without a record. On January 7, 2019, Circuit Attorney filed this Writ of Prohibition with Suggestions in Support and Exhibits. On January 8, 2019, we issued a Preliminary Order in Prohibition directing Judge Stelzer to refrain from all action in Cause No. 1822-CC11132 until further notice. Thereafter, Judge Stelzer, John Doe, and the St. Louis Police Officers Association filed their Combined Motion to Dismiss and Suggestions in Opposition with attached Exhibits.

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

"The writ of prohibition, an extraordinary remedy, is to be used with great caution and forbearance and only in cases of extreme necessity." State ex rel. Gardner v. Boyer, 561 S.W.3d 389, 394 (Mo. banc 2018) (quoting State ex rel. Douglas...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Suppes v. Curators of the Univ. of Mo.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 17 Noviembre 2020
    ...merits)."The purpose of an injunction is to prevent actual or threatened acts that constitute real injury." State ex rel. Gardner v. Stelzer , 568 S.W.3d 48, 51 (Mo. App. E.D. 2019) (internal quotation marks omitted). "An indispensable requirement for obtaining injunctive relief is the wron......
  • Mackey v. Belden, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • 3 Agosto 2021
    ... ... ruling on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim ... under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), this Court must “accept ... injury.” State ex rel. Gardner v. Stelzer , 568 ... S.W.3d 48, 51 (Mo.Ct.App. 2019) ... ...
  • Smith v. Stewart
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 12 Abril 2022
    ..., facts that invoke substantive law entitling them to relief on a recognized and pleaded legal theory. See State ex rel. Gardner v. Stelzer , 568 S.W.3d 48, 51 (Mo. App. E.D. 2019) and Magruder v. Pauley , 411 S.W.3d 323, 331 (Mo. App. W.D. 2013) (collectively indicating the same).2. Analys......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT