Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Cecil J. McFall 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
cecil-j-mcfall
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Personal Injury
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Cecil J. McFall

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jan 28, 2025

Cecil J. McFall, Appellant, vs. David E. Hogan, Respondent.

Appellant

Cecil J. McFall (Plaintiff) obtained a default judgment against David E. Hogan (Defendant) in a negligence action. The trial court granted Defendant's motion to set aside the default judgment, believing the service date on the return was 2023, making the default judgment premature. The appellate court reversed, finding that the return of service, when read in conjunction with the notary public's date, clearly indicated service occurred in 2022, meaning the default judgment was not premature. The case was remanded for reentry of the default judgment.