Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

United Trans Logistics, Inc. 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
united-trans-logistics-inc
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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 United Trans Logistics, Inc.

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District / Aug 12, 2025

Xtra Lease LLC, Respondent, v. United Trans Logistics, Inc., Appellant.

Appellant

Appellant United Trans Logistics appealed the circuit court's denial of its second motion to set aside a default judgment entered in favor of Respondent Xtra Lease LLC. The underlying dispute involved breach of contract and an action on account. The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's denial, holding that the second motion to set aside the default judgment was barred by the doctrine of res judicata because the issues raised were substantially the same as those litigated in Appellant's first motion, which was not timely appealed.