Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Gerard H. Donovan 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
gerard-h-donovan
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Gerard H. Donovan

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Feb 4, 2020

Kansas City Area Transportation Authority vs. Gerard H. Donovan

Respondent

Sherry DeJanes Donovan and Gerard Donovan appealed a summary judgment in favor of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA) regarding ownership of a parcel of real property. The Donovans claimed ownership by adverse possession and asserted affirmative defenses of laches, waiver, and estoppel, arguing the property was an abandoned easement. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the KCATA owned the property in fee simple, and that adverse possession, laches, and estoppel claims are barred against public land under section 516.090 RSMo.