Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Jonathan Loomis 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
jonathan-loomis
Cases Shown
2
Top Practice Route
Insurance Bad Faith
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Jonathan Loomis

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Nov 13, 2018

Jonathan Loomis, Appellant, vs. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, Respondent.

Appellant

Jonathan Loomis appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to State Farm Fire and Casualty Company regarding underinsured motor vehicle coverage. Loomis was injured in an accident while covered by a temporary insurance binder, but State Farm denied his claim, asserting his coverage limits matched the at-fault driver's. The appellate court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case, holding that the insurance binder was ambiguous because it referenced a non-existent "Declarations Page" for coverage limits, thus creating a genuine issue of material fact.