Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Mark Easley 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
mark-easley
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Personal Injury
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Mark Easley

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Mar 5, 2024

Lara and Brian Fallon, Appellants, v. Mark Easley, Respondent.

Respondent

Lara and Brian Fallon sued attorney Mark Easley for legal malpractice, alleging he failed to timely draft and secure the execution of an amendment to their mother's trust. The proposed amendment would have increased the Fallons' share of the trust. The trial court granted summary judgment for Easley, finding that the Fallons, as non-client prospective beneficiaries of an unexecuted testamentary document, could not bring a malpractice claim. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the Donahue privity exception does not extend to unexecuted testamentary instruments and that the Fallons could not prove proximate causation or damages without an executed document evidencing their mother's intent.