Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

TAYLOR AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, LLC, D/B/A TAYLOR CHRYSLER DODGE JEEP RAM and TIMOTHY J. TAYLOR 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
taylor-automotive-group-llc-d/b/a-taylor-chrysler-dodge-jeep-ram-and-timothy-j-taylor
Cases Shown
1
Top Practice Route
Corporate 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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 TAYLOR AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, LLC, D/B/A TAYLOR CHRYSLER DODGE JEEP RAM and TIMOTHY J. TAYLOR

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Danielle Eads appealed a jury verdict in favor of Taylor Automotive Group on her claims of breach of contract, fraud, and Missouri Merchandising Practices Act violations. Eads raised three points on appeal concerning an edited jury instruction, the exclusion of an investigative report, and the refusal to publish an exhibit to the jury. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that Eads failed to preserve her instructional error claim, did not properly preserve the exclusion of the investigative report for review, and abandoned her third point on appeal by failing to cite relevant legal authority.