RIP Rick Teitelman

Rest in Peace, Judge Rick Teitleman.  He was a friend of mine and many and a shining light
among people, lawyers and judges. Many great things were said of him: Wikipedia page, Supreme court profile page, and post
dispatch obituary. He was a humble but brilliant lawyer and judge who dedicated himself to serving the poor and
underprivileged in accessing justice.

Here are some of his significant cases:

• State ex rel. Amrine v. Roper (2003): Teitelman’s 4-3 majority ruling ordered a new
  trial for death row inmate Joseph Amrine after witnesses recanted their testimony implicating him in a prison
  murder. Amrine was subsequently released after prosecutors declined to retry him. The case remains the only
  “freestanding claim of actual innocence” that Missouri courts have recognized.
• Hampton v. Big Boy Steel Erection (2003): This oft-cited case reset the standard of
  review for workers’ compensation cases, saying that courts should examine the evidence in support of an award in
  the context of the whole record. The unanimous decision overruled some 360 earlier cases that had employed a
  different method of review.
• Snodgras v. Martin & Bayley Inc. (2006): The unanimous opinion upheld Missouri’s
  so-called “dram-shop law,” finding that sellers of pre-packaged liquor can’t be sued for selling alcohol to a
  minor the way bars and restaurants can.
• Schoemehl v. Treasurer of the State of Missouri (2007): Under a strict reading of the
  state’s worker’s compensation law, Teitelman’s 4-3 ruling said a woman could continue collecting her husband’s
  benefits after he died, even though his death was unrelated to his on-the-job injury. Lawmakers changed the
  statute in 2008 in response to the ruling as part of a larger debate over the solvency of the Second Injury
  Fund, which covers workers whose existing infirmities are worsened by an on-the-job injury.
• Keveney v. Missouri Military Academy (2009): The case was one of three opinions issued
  the same day that reshaped employment law by allowing whistle-blowers who are fired to sue for wrongful
  termination. Teitelman’s Keveney ruling specifically extended that protection to contract workers. As it turned
  out, Teitelman also issued a lone dissent in one of the other employment cases, Margiotta v.
  Christian Hospital Northeast Northwest, saying the fired worker shouldn’t have to cite a
  particular law or rule that the employer broke to be able to sue.
• Brewer v. Missouri Title Loans Inc. (2010 and 2012): Teitelman’s initial majority
  ruling invalidated a waiver that barred the plaintiffs from pursuing class arbitration, finding it
  unconscionable. Following a remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the state court reconsidered the case and, once
  again, found the bar on class arbitration to be fatally unfair. The case finally ended in 2014 with a settlement
  that forgave $262 million in debt the plaintiffs alleged owed.
• Delana v. CED Sales Inc. (2016): Teitelman’s unanimous opinion recognized negligent
  entrustment as a valid cause of action against sellers of dangerous items. The ruling allowed a lawsuit to
  proceed against a store that sold a gun to a mentally ill woman who fatally shot her father. The suit settled in
  November for $2.2 million.

Just as famous are Teitelman’s many dissents, including:

• City of Arnold v. Tourkakis (2008): The majority said third-class Missouri cities
  could use eminent domain for redevelopment efforts, prompting cries from proponents of property rights.
  Teitelman, in a lone dissent, wrote that no Missouri city has the power of eminent domain until the legislature
  expressly provides for it.
• In the Matter of the Care and Treatment of Van Orden (2008): The majority found that
  is constitutional to civilly commit sex offenders using the “clear and convincing evidence” standard. In a solo
  dissent, Teitelman said the commitment law was punitive in nature and should use the “beyond a reasonable doubt”
  standard used in criminal proceedings. The plaintiff in the case, John Van Orden, is now part of an ongoing
  federal challenge to Missouri’s commitment process. A similar case was argued in the Missouri Supreme Court on
  Nov. 16.
• Missouri Alliance for Retired Americans v. Department of Labor and Industrial
  Relations(2009): The case began as a broad constitutional challenge to a 2005 overhaul of
  the state’s workers’ compensation laws. The unsigned plurality opinion that emerged more than a year after
  arguments reached a more modest result, holding only that workers who were now excluded from the worker’s
  compensation system still has the right to pursue lawsuits in court. In a lone dissent, Teitelman said the 2005
  changes were unconstitutional.
• Glossip v. Missouri Department of Transportation and Highway Patrol Employees’ Retirement
  System (2013): Not long ago, before the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage
  nationwide, the Missouri Supreme Court had its own brush with the hot-button issue. The court’s 5-2 unsigned
  opinion dodged the issue, ruling that the same-sex partner of a Highway Patrol officer killed in the line of
  duty couldn’t collect survivor benefits — not because he was gay, but because the couple had never married in
  any of the jurisdictions that recognized same-sex marriage at the time. In his impassioned dissent, Teitelman,
  joined by Judge George W. Draper III, said the case illustrated that gay people “continue to be singled out for
  disparate treatment even though the immutable fact of who one loves neither interferes with the rights of others
  nor has any relevance to one’s ability to contribute to society.”
• Dodson v. Ferrara (2016): For Teitelman, this case was a disappointing coda to the
  2012 Wattsdecision. The 5-2 majority upheld the legislative damage cap in wrongful death cases, even if
  they stem from medical malpractice, because the wrongful death cause of action was created by statute and not
  part of the common law. The rulings created a strange imbalance — damages are limited if a doctor causes
  someone’s death but not if the patient is merely injured. In his dissent, Teitelman said the wrongful death
  damage cap should be struck down as well.

Gary Burger

Founder | Injury Attorney
Gary Burger has dedicated his career to standing up against bullies. The founder and principal attorney of Burger Law | St. Louis Personal Injury Lawyer has helped hundreds of Missouri and Illinois individuals and families recover th …
Years of experience: 30 years
Location: St. Louis, MO

Chat With Us