Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Susan F. Bridegan 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
susan-f-bridegan
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Insurance Bad Faith
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 Susan F. Bridegan

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases
Appellant

Susan Bridegan sued Gary Turntine for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Bridegan, an uninsured motorist, challenged the constitutionality of section 303.390 RSMo, which prohibits uninsured motorists from collecting noneconomic damages, arguing it violated her right to a jury trial. The circuit court rejected her constitutional argument and awarded her economic damages. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court's judgment, declining to address the merits of the constitutional challenge because Bridegan failed to preserve the issue for appellate review by waiving her right to a jury trial.