St. Louis Counsel
Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

RICHARD A. CARDEN and ROSALIE P. CARDEN 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
richard-a-carden-and-rosalie-p-carden
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Civil Litigation
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

Civil Litigation

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.

Free ConsultationCall Ott Law Firm

Cases Involving RICHARD A. CARDEN and ROSALIE P. CARDEN

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases
Appellant

Richard and Rosalie Carden appealed, pro se, the dismissal of their petition for damages. The appellate court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Cardens' brief failed to comply with Rule 84.04's requirements for points relied on and argument sections, thereby preserving nothing for review. This marked the fifth time the Cardens' pro se appeals had been dismissed for similar briefing violations.

Civil Litigation