Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

James B. Declue, Defendant, Lexington National Insurance Corporation, Surety- 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
james-b-declue-defendant-lexington-national-insurance-corporation-surety
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Criminal 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 James B. Declue, Defendant, Lexington National Insurance Corporation, Surety-

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Lexington National Insurance Corporation, a surety, appealed the trial court's denial of its motions to vacate a $90,000 bond forfeiture judgment. The judgment was entered after defendant James DeClue failed to appear for sentencing. Lexington argued the judgment was void for lack of jurisdiction or due process, irregular, or should have been set aside because DeClue was later incarcerated elsewhere. The appellate court affirmed, finding the judgment was not void or irregular, and the statutory provision for setting aside forfeiture due to incarceration applies only before a final judgment is entered.