Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

LANA SLOAN 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
lana-sloan
Cases Shown
1
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 LANA SLOAN

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Lana Sloan appealed from a summary judgment in favor of Farm Bureau Town and Country Insurance Company of Missouri. Sloan sought medical payments coverage under a policy held by Joseph Webb after she was bitten by a dog owned by Webb's tenant, Jesse Clark, while on a public roadway adjacent to the insured premises. The circuit court granted summary judgment to Farm Bureau, finding the dog was not a "condition on the insured premises" as required for coverage. The appellate court affirmed, concluding that the policy language, consistent with common understanding and prior case law, does not include mobile property like a dog as a condition on the premises.