State of Missouri v. Community Alternatives Missouri, Inc.
267 S.W.3d 735 (2008)
Rule of Law:
A corporation can be held criminally liable for the acts of an employee if that employee qualifies as a "high managerial agent." An employee is considered a high managerial agent if, regardless of title or corporate-wide authority, they function in a position of authority comparable to a corporate officer with respect to the supervision of subordinate employees in a managerial capacity within a specific business unit.
Facts:
- Community Alternatives Missouri, Inc. (defendant) operated the Turtle Creek Group Home for developmentally disabled persons.
- Gary Oheim, a resident at Turtle Creek who was mentally retarded, had cerebral palsy, and was confined to a wheelchair, developed bedsores starting in October 2001.
- Mary Collura was the 'lead staff person' for Turtle Creek, with managerial responsibilities including supervising staff, managing residents' medical care, and disciplining employees.
- Between November 2001 and early January 2002, Oheim's bedsores worsened dramatically, developing a foul odor and becoming necrotic, with one sore becoming large enough to fit a fist into.
- During this period, other Turtle Creek staff repeatedly expressed concerns to Collura about Oheim's deteriorating condition.
- Collura dismissed staff concerns, falsely claimed Oheim was receiving medical care, instructed staff not to talk to doctors, tore up incident reports about the sores, and on one occasion, prevented a nurse practitioner from fully examining Oheim.
- On January 10, 2002, Oheim was hospitalized with severe Stage IV ulcers and a staph infection.
- Oheim died on January 30, 2002, from complications arising from the medical treatment required for the severe ulcers.
Procedural Posture:
- The State of Missouri charged Community Alternatives Missouri, Inc., by information, with the Class D felony of resident neglect in the state trial court.
- Following a trial, a jury convicted Community Alternatives Missouri, Inc. of resident neglect.
- Community Alternatives Missouri, Inc. (defendant-appellant) appealed the conviction to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an employee who supervises a single business unit of a multi-facility corporation, with managerial authority over subordinate employees at that unit, qualify as a 'high managerial agent' under Missouri statute § 562.056, thereby subjecting the corporation to criminal liability for the employee's criminal conduct?
Opinions:
Majority - Parrish, J.
Yes. An employee qualifies as a 'high managerial agent' for the purposes of corporate criminal liability if they are an agent in a position of authority comparable to that of a corporate officer with respect to the supervision of subordinate employees in a managerial capacity. The statute focuses on the function within the corporate structure, not merely job titles or corporate-wide authority. Here, Mary Collura managed and supervised the employees at Turtle Creek, was responsible for residents' medical care, disciplined staff, and was the only manager regularly present. Her authority at the facility level was comparable to that of a corporate officer for the purposes of managing that specific business unit. Therefore, her actions and knowing tolerance of neglect can be imputed to the corporation, Community Alternatives Missouri, Inc.
Concurring - Scott, J.
Yes. While concurring in the result, there is concern about the interpretation of 'high managerial agent.' The key issue is whether Collura's authority was 'comparable to that of a corporate officer.' The defendant (appellant) failed to meet its burden of proof on this point by not providing the court with necessary evidence, such as corporate bylaws, resolutions, or organizational charts, that would establish its corporate officers' authority for comparison. Without this evidence, and due to other briefing deficiencies, the court cannot properly evaluate the defendant's argument and must defer to the trial court's finding.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the scope of corporate criminal liability in Missouri, particularly for large corporations with numerous, decentralized business units. The court's decision establishes that a corporation cannot shield itself from liability by arguing that criminal conduct occurred at a low level of its organizational chart. By focusing on an employee's functional authority within their specific sphere of responsibility rather than their formal title or corporate-wide power, the ruling makes it easier for prosecutors to hold corporations accountable for crimes committed at the operational level. This precedent will likely influence how corporations structure their compliance and oversight programs, as liability can now clearly attach through the actions of a manager at a single facility.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: State of Missouri v. Community Alternatives Missouri, Inc. (2008)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"