St. Louis Counsel
Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

SCHIER COMPANY, INC., and GARY ALLEN SCHIER, Defendants- 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
schier-company-inc-and-gary-allen-schier-defendants
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 LitigationCorporate LawCriminal Law

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 SCHIER COMPANY, INC., and GARY ALLEN SCHIER, Defendants-

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases
Appellant

Schier Company, Inc. and Gary Allen Schier appealed a judgment finding them liable for violations of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA) and awarding restitution to the State of Missouri. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, primarily due to the appellants' failure to comply with mandatory appellate briefing rules, which preserved nothing for review. The court also rejected the appellants' arguments regarding the appropriateness of restitution versus rescission and the public policy scope of the MMPA for corporate consumers.

Corporate LawCivil LitigationCriminal Law