As the collateral consequences of court judgments gain increased recognition, courts in many states have modified traditional doctrinal approaches to mootness in order to give due regard to these repercussions. Missouri has not formally joined these states, yet a survey of recent mootness analyses within the state indicates that courts are seeking to allow for consideration of such consequences in spite of the doctrinal constraints. This tension has been most evident in appellate review of expired orders of protection for domestic violence, and the result has been vast inconsistency both in how courts approach the issue and how it is ultimately resolved. This article will seek to identify the underlying concerns that have fostered this unpredictability in Missouri, while also examining the advantages and disadvantages of the approaches taken in jurisdictions recognizing a collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine. In conclusion, this article will propose a new doctrinal approach in Missouri that reflects judicial concerns about collateral consequences without frustrating the purpose of the mootness doctrine in an adversarial system.

Included in

Law Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.