Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Jerry Bengston, 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
jerry-bengston-et-al
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Civil Litigation
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Jerry Bengston, et al

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / May 14, 2019

Abdiana Properties, Inc., et al vs. Jerry Bengston, et al

Respondent

Abdiana Properties, Inc. and Abdiana Ice House, Inc. sought private funding through the B.S.H.N. Defendants, who introduced them to Stone Development Inc. After paying a loan commitment fee, Abdiana did not receive funding or a refund, leading them to sue the B.S.H.N. Defendants for various claims including fraud and negligence. The B.S.H.N. Defendants appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to compel arbitration, arguing that arbitration clauses in two agreements should apply. The appellate court affirmed the denial, finding no valid arbitration agreement existed between the B.S.H.N. Defendants and Abdiana, as mutual assent was lacking for one agreement and the claims did not rely on the other.