⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

5 opinions for “Jackson v. Drivetime”

Missouri Court of Appeals · 2018-05-29 · Published · cited 0× · 555 S.W.3d 478
Per Curiam: *479DriveTime Car Sales Company, LLC appeals from the ruling of the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, denying its motion to compel David and Gifty Haight to arbitrate their claims against DriveTime for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and violation of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. Because a published op
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2010-03-10 · Published · cited 3× · 691 S.E.2d 653; 302 Ga. App. 767; 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 773; 2010 Ga. App. LEXIS 227
691 S.E.2d 653 (2010) JACKSON v. NEMDEGELT, INC. No. A09A2131. Court of Appeals of Georgia. March 10, 2010. *654 Kirby Clements Jr., for Appellant. Reynolds & Robin, Sherwin P. Robin, Savannah, Corinne A. McIntosh, for Appellee. BERNES, Judge. In this suit on a contract, Corliss Jackson appeals from the t
Court of Appeals of Mississippi · 2025-11-25 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2024-CA-00365-COA CNRS&Z INC., TOGO MOTORS LLC AND APPELLANTS SUNSHINE AUTOPLEX LLC v. BRIDGECREST ACCEPTANCE APPELLEES CORPORATION AND DRIVETIME CAR SALES COMPANY LLC DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/25/2024 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ROBERT B. HELFRICH COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
Supreme Court of Missouri · 2022-07-12 · Published · cited 0×
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI en banc BRIDGECREST ACCEPTANCE ) Opinion issued July 12, 2022, and modified CORPORATION, ) on the Court's own motion August 30, 2022 ) Appellant, ) ) No. SC99269 v. ) ) KELLY
District Court, D. New Mexico · 2018-11-29 · Published · cited 1× · 355 F. Supp. 3d 1065
James O. Browning, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiff's Reconsideration Motion, filed September 15, 2018 (Doc. 25) ("Reconsideration Motion"). The Court held a hearing on October 25, 2018. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court committed manifest legal error in its Memorandum Opinion and Order,