Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

ESTATE of BILLIE W. COLLINS, by and through its personal representative SHANNON COLLINS 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
estate-of-billie-w-collins-by-and-through-its-personal-representative-shannon-collins
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 ESTATE of BILLIE W. COLLINS, by and through its personal representative SHANNON COLLINS

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Shannon Collins, as personal representative of her father's estate, appealed the trial court's judgment finding that her father, Billie Collins, and his former wife, Frances Collins, had an implied partnership for a cattle farm. The Estate argued the trial court misapplied the law because there was no specific agreement to share profits and losses. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the Estate's argument was improperly premised on factual inferences contrary to the judgment and failed to follow the required analytical framework for challenging factual findings on appeal.