Ott Law Firm

Missouri Case Party

Universal Credit Acceptance, Inc., Assignee of Instacredit Automart 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
universal-credit-acceptance-inc-assignee-of-instacredit-automart
Cases Shown
1
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 Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.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.

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 Universal Credit Acceptance, Inc., Assignee of Instacredit Automart

Showing up to 50 recent opinion records for this party.

Browse party cases

Universal Credit Acceptance, Inc. (Plaintiff) sought a deficiency judgment against Renwick Ware (Defendant) for breach of contract. After a default judgment was set aside, Defendant filed counterclaims, and Plaintiff filed a voluntary dismissal. A successor judge granted Plaintiff's motion to reconsider a prior order, finding Defendant's counterclaims untimely and invalid, and dismissing them. The appellate court reversed, holding that Defendant's counterclaims were timely filed and not dismissed by Plaintiff's voluntary dismissal, and remanded the case for further proceedings on the counterclaims.