Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Matthew Parciak 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
matthew-parciak
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Family 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

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 Matthew Parciak

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Aug 7, 2018

Matthew Parciak, Respondent, vs. Blanca Parciak, Appellant.

Respondent

Wife Blanca Parciak and Husband Matthew Parciak appealed and cross-appealed from a trial court's dissolution judgment concerning maintenance, attorney's fees, and property division. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of attorney's fees and its decision regarding Husband's mortgage liability on the marital home. However, the court reversed and remanded the maintenance award, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by imposing a limited duration and non-modifiable nature without sufficient evidence of an impending change in Wife's financial circumstances.