Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Colton Groom 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
colton-groom
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Colton Groom

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jun 2, 2020

Colton Groom, Appellant, vs. Director of Revenue, Respondent.

Appellant

Colton Groom appealed the trial court's judgment suspending his driving privileges after he was stopped for speeding and subsequently arrested for driving while intoxicated. Groom, an underage driver, argued the trial court erred by relying on radar evidence to establish probable cause for the stop and by misapplying the law regarding a "special safeguard" for underage drivers. The Eastern District affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that probable cause for an alcohol-related arrest can develop after an initial stop, and the extensive foundation for radar evidence was not required for the administrative suspension.