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
seth-reynolds
Cases Shown
2
Top Practice Route
Real Estate
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.
Seth Reynolds appealed a civil contempt ruling issued by the Circuit Court of Boone County for his failure to comply with a permanent injunction requiring him to remove structures violating zoning regulations and encroaching on a public right-of-way. Reynolds also challenged the denial of his Rule 74.06 motion to correct the underlying injunction judgment. The appellate court affirmed the contempt ruling, finding substantial evidence supported the circuit court's determination that Reynolds had the present ability to purge his contempt. The court further affirmed the denial of the Rule 74.06 motion, concluding it was an impermissible collateral attack on a final judgment.
Seth Reynolds appealed a permanent injunction requiring him to remove a detached garage, privacy fence, and satellite dish he erected in a public right-of-way and setback area in Boone County. The trial court issued the injunction after finding Reynolds's structures violated zoning ordinances and encroached on the County's right-of-way. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the County established its entitlement to a permanent injunction, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in balancing the equities, and the structures interfered with public rights.