Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Austin McGinnis Missouri Cases

This party appears in the Ott Law Firm Missouri court opinion archive. The cases below connect legal research paths to related practice pages when the opinions map to practical client issues.

Party ID
austin-mcginnis
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Civil Litigation
Archive note: This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source. This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Related Practice Pages

Practical guidance connected to this party profile

These links route party-name research from the court archive into Ott Law Firm practice pages when the associated opinions map to a practical client issue.

Legal Help From The Archive

Need help turning court research into a case plan?

If a party-profile research path points to a current injury, employment, insurance, or litigation issue, Ott Law Firm can review the facts and explain practical next steps.

Cases Involving Austin McGinnis

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Apr 12, 2022

Hannah Stickler and Molly Stickler vs. Austin McGinnis

Respondent

Austin McGinnis appealed the denial of his motion to enforce a settlement agreement against Hannah and Molly Stickler, whose father died as a result of a motor vehicle collision involving McGinnis. The Sticklers had sent a time-limited settlement demand to McGinnis's insurer, State Farm. The trial court denied the motion, finding that the parties never entered into a valid and enforceable settlement agreement due to a lack of offer, acceptance, and consideration. The appellate court affirmed, concluding that State Farm's response was not a mirror-image acceptance of the Sticklers' offer, and thus no meeting of the minds occurred.