Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Dennie R. Gladney, et al. 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
dennie-r-gladney-et-al
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Dennie R. Gladney, et al.

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jan 14, 2020

WMAC 2013, LLC, Respondent, vs. Dennie R. Gladney, et al., Appellants.

Appellant

Dennie R., Sharon, and Diana Gladney appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to WMAC 2013, LLC in a quiet title and ejectment action concerning property acquired through a tax sale. The Gladneys argued that a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding whether the tax lien certificate was sold to a prohibited purchaser under Section 140.190.2, which they contended would invalidate WMAC13's title. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, holding that the alleged status of the purchaser as prohibited was not a material fact because Section 140.610 exclusively enumerates the grounds for challenging a collector's deed, and a prohibited purchaser is not among them.