St. Louis Counsel
Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

James Ray Maxey, et al. 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-ray-maxey-et-al
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

Criminal LawCivil Litigation

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.

Free ConsultationCall Ott Law Firm

Cases Involving James Ray Maxey, et al.

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Jul 11, 2023

David Duvall, Appellant, v. James Ray Maxey, et al., Respondents

Respondent

David Duvall, acting pro se, appealed the circuit court's judgment granting Respondents' motions to dismiss his Third Amended Petition. Respondents moved to dismiss the appeal, asserting Duvall failed to compile the entire record on appeal, specifically omitting the transcript of the hearing on the motions to dismiss. The appellate court granted Respondents' motion and dismissed the appeal, holding that Duvall's failure to comply with Rule 81.12 by not providing the necessary transcript precluded appellate review.

Criminal LawCivil Litigation