Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Gregory Tillett 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
gregory-tillett
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Family Law
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Gregory Tillett

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Aug 4, 2020

Gregory Tillett, Appellant, vs. Margaret Tillett, Respondent.

Appellant

Gregory Tillett appealed the trial court's judgment on his motion to modify his maintenance obligation to Margaret Tillett, seeking to eliminate it entirely. The trial court reduced his monthly obligation from $2,470 to $1,500 but rejected his argument to impute income to Wife due to her retirement and continued his life insurance obligation. The appellate court affirmed, finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Wife's retirement was appropriate given her age and health, and that she made good faith efforts toward self-sufficiency.