Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Capitol South, Inc. 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
capitol-south-inc
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Real Estate
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Capitol South, Inc.

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Date unavailable

Capitol South, Inc., Appellant, v. Concord Fitness MO, LLC, Respondent.

Appellant

Capitol South, Inc. (landlord) appealed the trial court's judgment in favor of Concord Fitness MO, LLC (tenant) on its claim for unlawful detainer. The landlord argued it properly terminated the lease due to the tenant's repeated failure to pay rent, invoking a provision that allowed termination without notice or opportunity to cure. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that the landlord's termination was premature because the specific conditions for termination under the "Repeated Default Provision" of the lease had not yet been met.