Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

GORDON BUNDY and MARLENE BUNDY, trustees of the Gordon G. Bundy and Marlene K. Bundy Trust dated December 13, 2017 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
gordon-bundy-and-marlene-bundy-trustees-of-the-gordon-g-bundy-and-marlene-k-bundy-trust-dated-december-13-2017
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 GORDON BUNDY and MARLENE BUNDY, trustees of the Gordon G. Bundy and Marlene K. Bundy Trust dated December 13, 2017

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Neighboring property owners, the Bundys and Rapiens, sued each other over the use and maintenance of a shared gravel road easement. The trial court granted injunctive relief, dictating specific maintenance responsibilities and restrictions for portions of the road. On appeal, the Bundys argued the trial court misapplied the law. The appellate court vacated the judgment and remanded the case, holding that a statutory remedy under Chapter 228 RSMo provided an adequate remedy at law, precluding equitable injunctive relief, and that the injunction granted exceeded the scope of the pleadings and evidence.