Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Cornerstone Mortgage, 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
cornerstone-mortgage-inc
Cases Shown
2
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Cornerstone Mortgage, Inc.

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Mar 9, 2021

Cornerstone Mortgage Inc., Respondent, vs. Kurt Ponzar and Sandra Ponzar, Appellants.

Respondent

Kurt and Sandra Ponzar appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to vacate interlocutory orders and its retroactive declaration that a 2011 disbursement order was final. The underlying dispute involved a rescinded home loan, unjust enrichment, and the disbursement of fire insurance proceeds to Cornerstone Mortgage, Inc. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion to vacate, finding that while the retroactive denomination of the order was erroneous, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion on its merits regarding jurisdiction, garnishment procedures, or the effect of bankruptcy.