Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Phillip G. Gillespie 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
phillip-g-gillespie
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Phillip G. Gillespie

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District / Dec 13, 2022

Phillip G. Gillespie vs. Elizabeth M. Gillespie

Appellant

Elizabeth Gillespie (Wife) appealed the circuit court's judgment, which found that Phillip Gillespie's (Husband) obligation to pay Wife a share of marital home sale profits was satisfied under Section 516.350, RSMo. The dissolution judgment, incorporating a settlement contract, awarded Husband the home and provided for equal division of remaining profits upon sale. Husband sold the home more than eleven years after the judgment, and Wife sought her share. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Section 516.350 applies to such provisions, even if the exact monetary amount is not ascertainable at the time of judgment, and Wife's failure to revive the judgment within ten years barred her claim.