Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

BRANDON KEELING 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
brandon-keeling
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Corporate Law
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 BRANDON KEELING

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District / Mar 26, 2021

BRANDON KEELING, Respondent vs. PREFERRED POULTRY SUPPLY, LLC, Appellant

Respondent

Brandon Keeling sued Preferred Poultry Supply, LLC (PPS) for breach of contract and misrepresentation related to a construction project. The trial court denied PPS's motion to compel arbitration. The appellate court reversed, holding that the order denying arbitration was immediately appealable and that the Federal Arbitration Act applied, compelling arbitration for all claims. The court found the arbitration agreement valid and enforceable, rejecting Keeling's argument regarding lack of mutuality.